| 28 Jan 2026 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | hmm | 23:30:11 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | im worried that the minimal-bootstrap PR just broke staging | 23:30:21 |
dish [Fox/It/She] |  Download 28-18-30-34.png | 23:30:51 |
whispers [& it/fae] | fwiw, stdenv itself did manage to build fine on x86_64-linux https://hydra.nixos.org/build/320736662 | 23:31:43 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | any ideas why my build is broken | 23:33:41 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | I just rebased my branch to latest staging, will push to the above PR | 23:33:57 |
whispers [& it/fae] | did a git fetch upstream refs/pull/435345/merge:go-bootstrap && jj new go-bootstrap && nom-build -A go in nixpkgs and gccgo is in the process of configuring just fine for me? | 23:39:49 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | okay this does seem to be exclusive to my homelab for... reasons :think | 23:37:17 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | * okay this does seem to be exclusive to my homelab for... reasons 🤔 | 23:37:23 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | hmmmmmmm | 23:41:36 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | very strange, checking my homelab | 23:41:42 |
| 29 Jan 2026 |
rosssmyth | Wrote my thoughts about block on freebsd support in the Go PR | 00:41:52 |
rosssmyth | Freebsd support shouldn't really anything tbh since it's such a small userbase. If someone wants freebsd support they can write it themselves rather than pushing the burden on people who don't care nor have a way to test such things. | 00:43:07 |
rosssmyth | * Freebsd support shouldn't really block anything tbh since it's such a small userbase. If someone wants freebsd support they can write it themselves rather than pushing the burden on people who don't care nor have a way to test such things. | 00:43:25 |
rosssmyth | Similar to Rust's tiers where lower tier platforms for the most part cannot block things | 00:44:10 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | In reply to @pyrox:pyrox.dev very strange, checking my homelab fixed the issue but keeping an eye on it. confirming that things work well. | 00:48:34 |
dish [Fox/It/She] | In reply to @rosssmyth:matrix.org Freebsd support shouldn't really anything tbh since it's such a small userbase. If someone wants freebsd support they can write it themselves rather than pushing the burden on people who don't care nor have a way to test such things. agree with this pretty much, thank you ^^ | 00:49:16 |
aleksi | Huh, yeah I recall seeing issues with xz at some point, but only in pre-stdenv stages. I thought that was fixed when I used an xz with more robust build inputs. Yeah, I think it's worth keeping an eye on it | 06:16:44 |
aleksi | On that topic, I'm also looking at the prospect of aarch64-native bootstrap. Right now I'm porting the tinycc assembler to aarch64. The upstream only has codegen support | 06:18:35 |
Tristan Ross | In reply to @aleksi:pikaviestin.fi
On that topic, I'm also looking at the prospect of aarch64-native bootstrap. Right now I'm porting the tinycc assembler to aarch64. The upstream only has codegen support Nice. I can definitely review that since I mainly use aarch64 hardware. | 07:02:35 |
K900 | IMO I'd rather work towards a cross bootstrap path | 07:04:01 |
K900 | Because that will unlock a lot more targets | 07:04:06 |
Atemu | Shouldn't cross just simply work already? | 09:25:20 |
Atemu | It uses the regular buildPlatform compiler to build the cross-compiler, right? | 09:26:13 |
Atemu | If buildPlatform.isX86, it should be bootstrapped from minimal | 09:27:33 |
Atemu | Also, while it'd be nice, cross is still rather niche compared to native aarch64. The point of source bootstrap is to reduce the trust necessary for users. I'd first want native bootstrap on the platforms that people actually use. | 09:34:23 |
K900 | I mean cross as default bootstrap path | 10:54:47 |
K900 | Instead of relying on bootstrap-tools | 10:54:51 |
Randy Eckenrode | (Catching up.) Re: bootstrapping from source. Swift currently does (when it builds at all). The rewrite and update to 6.2 will preserve source-based bootstrapping. | 16:21:55 |
Randy Eckenrode | I have plans for Darwin’s stdenv, but they’re a low priority behind other things. | 16:51:05 |