!NhAsaYbbgmzHtXTPQJ:funklause.de

Nix NodeJS

209 Members
60 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
10 Aug 2023
@gdesforges:matrix.org@gdesforges:matrix.org Lily Foster: I've tested manually marp-cli from your Nix code and it works well πŸŽ‰ I've pushed a PR. Are you the one who can approve? https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/248107 10:14:12
@gdesforges:matrix.org@gdesforges:matrix.org * Lily Foster: I've tested manually marp-cli from your Nix code and it works well πŸŽ‰ I've pushed a PR. Are you the one who can approve and merge? https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/248107 10:14:25
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster
In reply to @gdesforges:matrix.org
Lily Foster: I've tested manually marp-cli from your Nix code and it works well πŸŽ‰ I've pushed a PR. Are you the one who can approve and merge? https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/248107
Yep, I can. Request my review and I'll try to get to it today
10:15:11
@robert:funklause.dedotlambda Ambroisie: Does pnpm-lock-export need internet access and does it have a reproducible output? 16:41:27
@ambroisie:belanyi.fr@ambroisie:belanyi.fr
In reply to @robert:funklause.de
Ambroisie: Does pnpm-lock-export need internet access and does it have a reproducible output?
  1. I don't think so
  2. I think so
    But I haven't checked either
16:51:33
@ambroisie:belanyi.fr@ambroisie:belanyi.fr* In reply to @robert:funklause.de Ambroisie: Does pnpm-lock-export need internet access and does it have a reproducible output? I don't think so I think so But I haven't checked either 16:51:50
@ambroisie:belanyi.fr@ambroisie:belanyi.frUrgh, the formatting is absolutely screwed up16:52:06
@robert:funklause.dedotlambda So why use it in the update script rather than postPatch? 16:59:12
@ambroisie:belanyi.fr@ambroisie:belanyi.frBecause I don't want to find out that either point is wrong :') 17:01:15
@robert:funklause.dedotlambdaHaha17:01:41
@lily:lily.flowersLily FosterIt does lockfile v1 output so npm can still get spooked. It should be deterministic but may not be reproducible across versions so doing it in updateScript is probably a better idea17:05:24
@robert:funklause.dedotlambdaWhat does "reproducible across versions" mean?17:13:35
@robert:funklause.dedotlambdaUsing it in an updateScript has the big disadvantage of having to commit thousands of lines of code to nixpkgs.17:13:35
@robert:funklause.dedotlambda
In reply to @robert:funklause.de
What does "reproducible across versions" mean?
Oh, across versions of pnpm-lock-export
17:16:33
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster
In reply to @robert:funklause.de
What does "reproducible across versions" mean?
Like if the output is one way in version 1.0 but then later if the package is updated to 2.0, the output could be subtly different (ask me how I've become paranoid about this πŸ™ƒ)
17:16:53
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster
In reply to @robert:funklause.de
Oh, across versions of pnpm-lock-export
Yeah
17:16:56
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster* In reply to @robert:funklause.de What does "reproducible across versions" mean? Like if the pnpm-lock-export output is one way in version 1.0 but then later if the package is updated to 2.0, the output could be subtly different (ask me how I've become paranoid about this πŸ™ƒ)17:17:08
@robert:funklause.dedotlambda That could be remediated by using different attributes in all-packages.nix for different versions 17:18:23
@lily:lily.flowersLily FosterIt could maybe. I've seen it change across minor versions for, e.g., tomlq though, so unless the project specifically either allows specifying a reproducible format or promises output reproducibility I've become distrustful of it :)17:20:14
@lily:lily.flowersLily FosterI'd rather we just made our own pnpm-lockfile-equivalent because then we would be in control of the output reproducibility17:20:38
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster(And not just because npm still does Bad Stuffℒ️ with v1 lockfiles sometimes)17:21:04
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster
In reply to @countoren:matrix.org
Lily Foster: Thank you for your help
Okay apparently it was RUST_LOG not RUSTLOG, but don't worry about grabbing the log. I fiddled with it locally and found the problem. Can you try updating your flake input from that branch, invalidate the fetcher hash, and try again?
17:49:34
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster
In reply to @countoren:matrix.org
Lily Foster: Thank you for your help
* Okay apparently it was RUST_LOG not RUSTLOG, but don't worry about grabbing the log anymore. I fiddled with it locally and found the problem. Can you try updating your flake input from that branch, invalidate the fetcher hash, and try again?
17:49:44
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster* oren: Okay apparently it was RUST_LOG not RUSTLOG, but don't worry about grabbing the log anymore. I fiddled with it locally and found the problem. Can you try updating your flake input from that branch, invalidate the fetcher hash, and try again?18:15:24
@countoren:matrix.orgcountorensure18:43:16
@robert:funklause.dedotlambda
In reply to @lily:lily.flowers
I'd rather we just made our own pnpm-lockfile-equivalent because then we would be in control of the output reproducibility
We can fork the project cause it looks kinda dead anyway.
18:44:59
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster
In reply to @robert:funklause.de
We can fork the project cause it looks kinda dead anyway.
I haven't looked into the code enough, but if it's not cancer, sure if you want go ahead
18:45:56
@countoren:matrix.orgcountoren
In reply to @lily:lily.flowers
oren: Okay apparently it was
RUST_LOG not RUSTLOG, but don't worry about grabbing the log anymore. I fiddled with it locally and found the problem. Can you try updating your flake input from that branch, invalidate the fetcher hash, and try again?
same branch right?
18:46:14
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster
In reply to @countoren:matrix.org
same branch right?
Yep!
18:47:25
@countoren:matrix.orgcountorenI think we downloaded them, I am getting missing build script tho18:49:49

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6