| 22 Jan 2024 |
 raitobezarius | #compilers:nixos.org seems better but people from there are kinda here too | 18:25:31 |
| raitobezarius | I'd suggest to find who created the separation (if it's not done since the beginning) and ask explicitly this person about this | 18:26:15 |
| raitobezarius | I'd naively believe that separating libcxx / libcxxabi is good practice because those are two different components and they deserve to be two different storepaths | 18:26:36 |
 a-n-n-a-l-e-e | i thought that the llvm components were provided separately but later combined into a monorepo however i may be mistaken -- need to dig a little deeper. | 18:27:39 |
| raitobezarius | the source code is a monorepo | 18:28:09 |
| raitobezarius | but we do fanout all of that in multiple different derivations | 18:28:16 |
| raitobezarius | we do even filter the monorepo to keep only the trees we care about | 18:28:30 |
| raitobezarius | if it makes sense to build libcxxabi altogether:
- all the time
- only for Apple
it's something that can be hacked in the relevant machinery to support it, I'd say?
| 18:29:21 |
| a-n-n-a-l-e-e | i thought that the monorepo happened sometime around llvm11. | 18:29:41 |
| raitobezarius | ah you are talking about the history | 18:30:26 |
| a-n-n-a-l-e-e | yes. | 18:30:33 |
| raitobezarius | It was not clear you were answering to 2nd line | 18:30:39 |
| raitobezarius | but yeah I understand that there were a separation because it was natural | 18:31:43 |
| raitobezarius | I wonder if it still makes sense to keep that separation | 18:31:48 |
| raitobezarius | as in, do anyone get meaningful advantage from overriding libcxxabi without touching the rest | 18:31:58 |
| a-n-n-a-l-e-e | right -- that sums up my question. if i end up combining them for darwin the code would be easier if i could do the same for all platforms. | 18:36:12 |
| raitobezarius | I'm definitely not competent enough to answer it, alas | 18:36:40 |
| a-n-n-a-l-e-e | thanks for chiming in. perhaps it is best if i also create an issue though, except for you approving and merging a backport (thanks), i haven't had any feedback from any llvm maintainers pinged in previous issue or PR, though perhaps that is just due to them being darwin only. | 18:44:41 |
| raitobezarius | Yeah, for Darwin, Reckrenode is more the person for LLVM | 18:47:52 |
| raitobezarius | I prefer to work on the x86/RISC-V/UEFI (lol) aspect of LLVM and I don't have a deep understanding like many other maintainers | 18:48:25 |
| a-n-n-a-l-e-e | ok -- we've been communicating in macos channel. | 18:48:33 |
| raitobezarius | The maintainer field is kinda misleading on this subsystem of nixpkgs | 18:48:34 |
| raitobezarius | Everyone has their area of interests / competence and people tends to be really busy until something happens | 18:48:49 |
| raitobezarius | Feel free to move on with the things you deem important for Darwin and ping me if you need more buy-in from a larger LLVM audience | 18:49:06 |
| raitobezarius | You and Reckrenode are clearly our domain experts in that matter :) | 18:49:23 |
| a-n-n-a-l-e-e | i don't have any love for darwin, just setup a hackintosh vm to fix bugs in ZHF 23.11 and it started segfaulting so just been fixing bugs related to that. prior to that was getting darwin to boot in a vm in 2002 or so due to their use of 32 bit address space in a 16 bit segment. | 18:51:16 |
| raitobezarius | Amazing! :D | 18:51:38 |
| raitobezarius | I really cannot muster the energy to work on a proprietary platform on a volunteer perspective, so props to those who can | 18:51:53 |
| a-n-n-a-l-e-e | but i'd like to take these bugs to their conclusion since already started on it. | 18:52:04 |
| a-n-n-a-l-e-e | Redacted or Malformed Event | 18:52:35 |
