| 9 Oct 2024 |
 mjm | yeah that is indeed what i meant :) | 13:47:32 |
 chfkch | In reply to @linus:schreibt.jetzt
The version from nixpkgs is in cache.nixos.org Strange, it seems on both machines where i use lix it always does several minutes of build/test scripts. | 14:53:51 |
 Linux Hackerman | In reply to @chfkch:matrix.org
Strange, it seems on both machines where i use lix it always does several minutes of build/test scripts. Are you using the version from nixpkgs, or the lix flake? | 14:54:48 |
| chfkch | In reply to @linus:schreibt.jetzt
Are you using the version from nixpkgs, or the lix flake? Flake | 15:30:12 |
| mjm | i don't think the flake one is cached. the one in nixpkgs is | 16:33:26 |
 @jade_:matrix.org | use the lixFromNixpkgs overlay in the flake if you want to use lix from nixpkgs. | 20:29:14 |
| 10 Oct 2024 |
| chfkch | In reply to @jade_:matrix.org
use the lixFromNixpkgs overlay in the flake if you want to use lix from nixpkgs. I am a newbie, is there an example or something in the web i can look at. Otherwise i might switch to nixpkgs lix. I don't know why i did not use it in the first place, guess the lix homepage lead me to using the flake. | 04:37:31 |
| @jade_:matrix.org | the reason that you would use it is that there is a giant pile of software that does not use the nix from PATH | 04:37:59 |
| chfkch | Thank you all for your input. | 04:38:05 |
| @jade_:matrix.org | change nixosModules.default to nixosModules.lixFromNixpkgs in the flake instructions. then you are done. | 04:38:54 |
|  𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒗𝒊𝒓 changed their profile picture. | 13:21:08 |
 antifuchs | sooo when using nixosModules.lixFromNixpkgs, does the nixos-module flake require pinning, too? I'm trying to build unpinned and am getting "major version (got 2.91.0) other than the one the module was designed for (expecting 2.92)." | 13:28:55 |
 Charles | is your nixpkgs up to date | 14:23:23 |
| Charles | or maybe you need to be using the nixos-unstable branch | 14:23:38 |
 aloisw | Lix in current unstable is 2.91. | 14:23:58 |
| aloisw | 2.92 is not in releasable shape right now since static and 32-bit builds are broken. | 14:24:33 |
| 𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒗𝒊𝒓 changed their profile picture. | 15:17:20 |
 V. 🏳️⚧️ | Is there a way to do cross-compilation w/o compiling the entire toolchain from scratch? | 18:20:48 |
 K900 | Depends on which toolchai | 18:21:58 |
| K900 | * Depends on which toolchain | 18:21:59 |
| K900 | x86_64-linux to aarch64-linux should be cached at least up to stdenv on nixos-unstable | 18:22:09 |
| V. 🏳️⚧️ | If it is, I'm definitely not hitting that cache | 18:22:51 |
| V. 🏳️⚧️ | I'm compiling LLVM, GCC and binutils | 18:24:31 |
| V. 🏳️⚧️ | * I'm compiling LLVM, GCC and binutils, among other things | 18:28:00 |
| @jade_:matrix.org | In reply to @antifuchs:asf.computer
sooo when using nixosModules.lixFromNixpkgs, does the nixos-module flake require pinning, too? I'm trying to build unpinned and am getting "major version (got 2.91.0) other than the one the module was designed for (expecting 2.92)." yes | 18:47:24 |
| @jade_:matrix.org | you want to pin it to 2.91.0 | 18:47:31 |
| V. 🏳️⚧️ | In reply to @vigress9:matrix.org
I'm compiling LLVM, GCC and binutils The GHA runner ran out of memory bruh 😭 | 18:51:13 |
| V. 🏳️⚧️ | Microsoft will bust down my door | 18:51:27 |
 Lily Foster | oh yeah building cross in GHA is gonna run out of RAM more than likely if it's the free runners, let alone disk space | 18:51:38 |
| Lily Foster | if you want crimes for more disk space in free GHA runners, i've got cursed arcana for that i can share. but uh, wow do i hate GHA so much | 18:52:17 |
