| 19 Dec 2025 |
 kdn | * same on 2.93.3, funnily enough this is just a rebuild of the 2.93.3 after nixpkgs update | 15:37:56 |
 whispers (it/fae) | i haven't needed any workarounds, mine just Does That by default (and has had no issues)
~> nix-store --query --references /nix/store/2a4yaid7m4p4fn9yqj21rhxxdadq6ykr-agenix-0.15.0
/nix/store/20axvl7mgj15m23jgmnq97hx37fgz7bk-diffutils-3.12
/nix/store/fj3ksk20i032wns1w5rz1y76601p1dgr-mktemp-1.7
/nix/store/qvbwz06cqra3cmlra40v0adw75j6j7wm-jq-1.8.1-bin
/nix/store/rlq03x4cwf8zn73hxaxnx0zn5q9kifls-bash-5.3p3
/nix/store/sqr10wh3hb1wbsqmbjjv3mzv7hkz0qwj-lix-2.95.0pre-32d7c02b
/nix/store/vzjkjvfy1y6g7jjqfxnma6mkvf1qsn51-age-1.2.1
| 16:50:44 |
| whispers (it/fae) | though notably i don't use the flake, i just manually import overlay.nix and module.nix from npins | 16:51:44 |
| whispers (it/fae) | * though notably i don't use the flake, i just manually import overlay.nix and module.nix from npins. no clue if that changes anything | 16:52:05 |
| whispers (it/fae) | * though notably i don't use the flake, i just manually import overlay.nix and modules/age.nix from npins. no clue if that changes anything | 16:52:39 |
 Coca | A confusion a friend of mine just had with lix versions, https://docs.lix.systems/manual/lix/stable/ is for the latest version on nixpkgs but in the url it makes it out to be stable. Could it maybe be clarified that it's the latest stable one or something like that? | 18:25:04 |
 K900 | There is no separate "Lix stable" in nixpkgs, is there? | 18:26:18 |
| whispers (it/fae) | there is, but it's only every different from latest on a release channel | 18:27:32 |
| Coca | lixPackageSets.stable vs lixPackageSets.latest, I guess this might be more of a nixpkgs issue then with the naming(?) | 18:28:03 |
| whispers (it/fae) | aiui latest and stable are updated in lockstep on master, but if a new non-patch version of lix comes out, the currently active release branches will only have latest be updated, not stable | 18:28:57 |
| K900 | Huh OK that's a stable nixpkgs thing then | 18:29:11 |
| K900 | I'm too much of an unstable user I guess | 18:29:16 |
| Coca | 
Download image.png | 18:30:12 |
| Coca | I'm on unstable as well | 18:30:18 |
| Coca | and they are different | 18:30:22 |
| K900 | OK that's weird and I guess I missed this somehow | 18:30:48 |
| whispers (it/fae) | huh, i stand corrected | 18:35:38 |
 Rutile (Commentator2.0) feel free to ping | where can i send money to support lix / -infra? | 19:04:19 |
 neobrain | Heh I see, yeah I can relate how it's not the most pressing task to sit down and write automation for 😅 | 19:36:29 |
|  PopeRigby changed their display name from PopeRigby to "PopeRigby (UTC-8)". | 20:01:58 |
| PopeRigby changed their display name from "PopeRigby (UTC-8)" to PopeRigby. | 20:03:08 |
|  Bakbukdibbuk joined the room. | 21:27:17 |
| 20 Dec 2025 |
 just1602 | In reply to @k900:0upti.me
OK that's weird and I guess I missed this somehow I think the idea was to have 2.92 and then 2.93 as latest but keep 2.91 as stable due to the regression present in latest. | 05:56:13 |
|  Acid Bong joined the room. | 07:20:47 |
| Acid Bong | moin. i noticed that Nix and Lix do nix flake check differently: Nix evaluates everything in alphabetic order, but Lix's order is different. what's the specifics of this? | 07:26:02 |
 Sofie 🏳️⚧️ (she/her) | Me too is wondering this | 09:20:48 |
| Sofie 🏳️⚧️ (she/her) | I have hardware too ;) | 09:21:01 |
| K900 | Hardware is hard because of trust concerns | 09:49:28 |
| K900 | For money there's afnix opencollective | 09:49:50 |
| K900 | https://opencollective.com/afnix/donate | 09:49:50 |
