| 21 Aug 2023 |
|  daxvena set a profile picture. | 23:42:30 |
| 22 Aug 2023 |
 tea | In reply to @raboof:matrix.org
I did some tweaks in https://reproducible.nixos.org/nixos-iso-minimal-r13y/ - better but still not amazing on mobile. happy to take patches, creating a codeberg account should be simple and otherwise I'm happy to apply them for you :) Ok, I might send in patches like the good old days | 05:47:08 |
| tea | Also how often does the CI run? It is on the 07-25 state still for me | 05:49:08 |
 raboof | In reply to @noob_tea:matrix.org
Also how often does the CI run? It is on the 07-25 state still for me Currently still manual. I only updated minimal-r13y | 06:22:37 |
| 23 Aug 2023 |
|  @solidrhino:matrix.org set a profile picture. | 06:59:35 |
| 24 Aug 2023 |
|  @ironbound:hackerspace.pl joined the room. | 11:29:13 |
|  @rimuru:gentoo.chat changed their profile picture. | 19:01:58 |
| 25 Aug 2023 |
| raboof | It's so sad the NAR format doesn't preserve timestamps, so SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is usually meaningless (i.e. https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/112595). I wonder if it would make sense to introduce a convention where fetchers that can reliably determine the source date could store that somewhere - like in a /SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH file. set-source-date-epoch-to-latest.sh could then pick that up. Is that a crazy idea? | 08:14:02 |
 atemu12 | raboof: Sounds sane to me | 08:36:31 |
| atemu12 | nix-support/ already exists as a convention for example | 08:37:05 |
| raboof | ah, of course, so perhaps even nix-support/SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH | 08:37:58 |
| atemu12 | Problem is, intrsducing that now would require a change in all FOD hashes | 08:49:03 |
| atemu12 | An idea that popped to my head just now would be a non-FOD additional output which is a file that contains the unix timestamp | 08:50:53 |
| atemu12 | Stdenv could read that out | 08:51:23 |
| atemu12 | Not sure that's possible thougk | 08:51:59 |
| atemu12 | * Not sure that's possible though | 08:56:19 |
| raboof | maybe we should make it opt-in for now, so it's up to whoever enables the feature to update the FOD hash... or perhaps even cuter: produce it by default only if the source date is after 1-1-2024 (for the fetchers implemented in nixpkgs at least)? | 08:57:33 |
| atemu12 | raboof: Hah, that's an interesting idea | 08:59:20 |
| atemu12 | Won't work for software that doesn't really receive updates anymore though | 09:00:11 |
| raboof | true, but they won't break, they'll just stay as broken as they already were :) | 09:00:59 |
 Julien | Hello | 09:30:02 |
| Julien | I am having trouble trying to check for reproducibility of a package while using remote builders | 09:30:21 |
| Julien | I want to check for the reproducibility of a lot of derivations and a would like the builds to be performed on remote machines | 09:30:52 |
| Julien | So far it seems to me that Nix is not allowing to do that: if I do nix-build --check it will build locally and if I do nix-build --check --max-jobs 0 it will use my remote builders but do not tell me anything about the reproducibility of the derivation. I suppose some of you here may have tried to distribute the jobs of checking for the reproducibility of a lot of derivations, do you have any feedback on this kind of question ? | 09:32:34 |
