| 28 May 2023 |
 Lily Foster | In reply to @hellwolf:matrix.org
npm dependencies go really deep.
Indeed. I wonder if it's inherit to node, or just how npm/yarn works.
Tbh just how any similar system works. See Mix/Elixir, Rust/Cargo, Go, etc. Those don't go as deep as npm but they do get large | 14:23:00 |
 hellwolf | I see. | 14:45:41 |
| hellwolf | One more question, when using buildNpmPackage packages. do packages still share the build outputs of their dependencies if possible? | 14:46:12 |
| Lily Foster | In reply to @hellwolf:matrix.org
One more question, when using buildNpmPackage packages. do packages still share the build outputs of their dependencies if possible? How do you mean exactly? | 15:01:56 |
| Lily Foster | Like sharing dependency sources? | 15:02:07 |
| hellwolf | Like not having the same thing in the nix store twic | 15:04:32 |
| hellwolf | * Like not having the same thing in the nix store twice | 15:04:33 |
| Lily Foster | (If so, the answer is no because it's all cache FODs from the lockfiles. If there was something like importCargoLock then those would be I suppose by nature of how Nix works but until computed derivations you don't want to use that in nixpkgs mostly) | 15:04:50 |
| Lily Foster | In reply to @hellwolf:matrix.org
Like not having the same thing in the nix store twice Yeah no, given it generates npm caches for all deps as a single FOD. The amount of dedup that would do is probably not as much as you're expecting but one day it'll be able to do that | 15:05:51 |
| hellwolf | do you think auto-optimise-store = true will do some extra magic still? | 15:07:12 |
| Lily Foster | Good question. Probably? I forget how exactly that determines what to hard link but I suppose it will | 15:08:09 |
| Lily Foster | Due to the way npm's cacache works | 15:08:27 |
|  Yuu Yin left the room. | 20:31:26 |
| 30 May 2023 |
|  Emma [it/its] joined the room. | 12:07:30 |
|  hrnz joined the room. | 12:08:58 |
| Emma [it/its] | i came here to ask, is there any progress on pnpm support? | 12:22:24 |
| Lily Foster | There won't be for a short while unless someone else is able to help work on it (it's somewhat far down the priority list) | 12:23:30 |
| Emma [it/its] | ah | 12:24:03 |
| 1 Jun 2023 |
 Pol | Anybody willing to help upgrading code-server ? It's throwing an error while building and I have no clue how to fix it . | 09:19:54 |
| Pol | The pr is here: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/234289 | 09:21:23 |
| Pol | * Anybody willing to help upgrading code-server ? It's throwing an error while building and I have no clue how to fix it (I don't work with NodeJS). | 09:25:10 |
| Pol | * The pr is here: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/234289, I also opened an issue upstream at: https://github.com/coder/code-server/issues/6244
Maybe this rings a bell to someone? | 09:25:56 |
|  raphi changed their display name from raphi to raphi (element unread channel fix when). | 13:03:14 |
 adamcstephens | Looks like you're blocked on nodejs18 and the upstream support? | 13:25:50 |
| 2 Jun 2023 |
| Pol | No, I must use NodeJS 16. There's no support of NodeJS 18 in coder/code-server yet. | 06:45:18 |
| Pol | I have another question for NodeJS maintainers, if any here. | 06:45:30 |
| Pol | I would like to review this PR (https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/235445) but I don't really know if the proposal is a good idea or not yet. | 06:45:59 |
| adamcstephens | In reply to @drupol:matrix.org
No, I must use NodeJS 16. There's no support of NodeJS 18 in coder/code-server yet. I understand that, but 16 was already marked as EOL for 23.05. | 13:22:54 |
| adamcstephens | Would we consider reverting that change for master/unstable until 16 actually becomes EOL in September? | 13:24:11 |
| Lily Foster | In reply to @drupol:matrix.org
No, I must use NodeJS 16. There's no support of NodeJS 18 in coder/code-server yet. I think that's what adamcstephens was saying | 13:35:17 |
