| 20 Jun 2025 |
 John Ericson | Or static executables | 23:02:46 |
| John Ericson | If whole systems a la NixOS fail to relocate, that's not ideal but it doesn't need to be fatal for that use-case | 23:17:33 |
| 22 Jun 2025 |
 tobim | Redacted or Malformed Event | 05:05:32 |
| tobim | Redacted or Malformed Event | 05:05:33 |
| John Ericson | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
IIRC #!/usr/bin/env -S is not portable wrt macOS so may not be a good solution for shebangs. https://ss64.com/mac/env.html actually the macOS env looks more powerful | 05:57:26 |
| John Ericson | Any chance we can get these features in coreutils? | 05:57:44 |
| John Ericson | Then we don't need a shim exe, because we can just expand an environment variable | 05:58:07 |
 p14 | emily: Tristan Ross: Can we entertain merging [0] as-is since it fixes a regression? The question of providing a "fake libgcc" is something requiring further development/enablement. https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/417354 | 10:44:19 |
| p14 | * emily: Tristan Ross: Can we entertain merging [0] as-is since it fixes a regression? The question of providing a "fake libgcc" is something requiring further development/enablement. [0] https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/417354 | 10:44:25 |
| p14 | * emily: Tristan Ross: Can we entertain merging [0] as-is since it fixes a regression? The question of providing a "fake static libgcc" is something requiring further development/enablement. [0] https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/417354 | 10:44:32 |
 emily | shebangs are parsed differently though | 11:22:11 |
| emily | I forget the exact differences | 11:22:16 |
|  SomeoneSerge (Ever OOMed by Element) changed their display name from SomeoneSerge (UTC+U[-12,12]) to SomeoneSerge (Ever OOMed by Element). | 12:12:32 |
|  o_________o joined the room. | 13:23:08 |
| 24 Jun 2025 |
|  Anton joined the room. | 10:43:27 |
|  sielicki joined the room. | 22:17:05 |
| 25 Jun 2025 |
| emily | tomberek: John Ericson: in re relocatable store https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31959 | 15:13:35 |
| emily | does anyone understand better than me why we have both .parsed.cpu.arch and .gcc.arch | 17:45:54 |
| emily | like I get that the latter can be a more specific model but we also condition on its existence in canExecute in a way I don't fully understand, and set it for some systems even when it's identical | 17:58:31 |
 K900 | gcc.arch is -march I think? | 17:59:43 |
| emily | right. but why do we set it to armv8-a explicitly for AArch64? | 19:02:12 |
| emily | that's already how the CPU parses | 19:02:24 |
| K900 | idk probably eval somewhere | 19:02:31 |
| emily | I doubt it. x86 doesn't get the field set | 19:02:54 |
| emily | I suspect it's just a historical thing | 19:03:13 |
 Grimmauld (any/all) | oh btw, did the i686 time thing happen yet? | 19:04:25 |
| K900 | Nope | 19:04:48 |
| K900 | Fuck | 19:04:50 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | XD | 19:04:56 |
| K900 | I might be sniped into doing it tomorrow :( | 19:04:59 |
