Nixpkgs Stdenv | 228 Members | |
| 74 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 22 Jun 2024 | ||
In reply to @w4tsn:darmstadt.socialAn alternative to add the scripts to the gcc package could be to modify buildFHSUserEnv to provide these scripts if gcc is part of the env. If buildFHSUserEnv is designed to provide a POSIX compliant shell that is | 13:15:45 | |
| I just went through a round of 'configure phase fails with message buried in config.log', 'try to determine if compiler works', 'it seems to work', 'but actually doesn't work correctly in the stdenv', where if the stdenv had just refused to build with a clear message showing it can't build hello world main.c it would have saved a bunch of time. | 13:16:03 | |
| I guess from the implementation of the stdenv's builder this might not be trivial to achieve: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/1eae5f88019f10beb0da370cc7d1726471ed11da/pkgs/stdenv/generic/builder.sh#L23-L24 Is it straight forward to 'drop into the stdenv we just built' at the end of that script and attempt to run the compiler? | 13:22:00 | |
In reply to @p14:matrix.orgNo, cc is added after the builder is built | 13:22:46 | |
| I think so do check | 13:23:30 | |
Oh, OK. Though an issue is that you can often break it by per-package stuff, e.g. NIX_CFLAGS_COMPILE. | 14:12:36 | |
In reply to @vcunat:matrix.orgYeah; I realise that is also an issue. I am first considering just broken stdenv though. At least with a stdenv check you only pay for a trivial compile once for the stdenv and not for every package, which seems more bearable. A per package check might also be nice but obviously comes at a greater compute cost. | 14:41:40 | |
In reply to @artturin:matrix.orgNot quite able to follow what you mean there by “after the builder”, what I see is that stdenv has a fairly trivial shell script which builds the stdenv and it has the cc passed into it. Unless I misunderstand… | 14:43:17 | |
| 29 Jun 2024 | ||
| 22:25:02 | ||
| 4 Jul 2024 | ||
| 15:46:23 | ||
| 15:54:09 | ||
| 19:10:28 | ||
| 7 Jul 2024 | ||
| 09:39:05 | ||
| 9 Jul 2024 | ||
| 20:30:35 | ||
| 10 Jul 2024 | ||
| Could I get a review and potential merge on this PR? At least one person ran into trouble because of the issue it's fixing (compiler flags being repeated hundreds of times) https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/301634 | 18:25:47 | |
| I still kinda wish it wouldn't all be bash, it's not easy on the eyes at all | 20:19:52 | |
| Totally agree, it wasn't fun at all to write this function, but it seems that we're stuck with bash for the foreseeable future | 23:04:58 | |
| 11 Jul 2024 | ||
| Thank you for doing that | 07:39:25 | |
| I've one question and then I'd say it's good to go, but my bash isn't that great | 07:39:58 | |
| 15 Jul 2024 | ||
| 00:28:04 | ||
| 17:28:44 | ||
| 17:42:24 | ||
| 23 Jul 2024 | ||
| 08:21:01 | ||
| 24 Jul 2024 | ||
| 10:15:29 | ||
| 26 Jul 2024 | ||
| 03:12:38 | ||
| 30 Jul 2024 | ||
| Looking into getting Zig to be able to bootstrap Nix. I have started figuring things out. | 04:02:04 | |
| The idea is to be able to use Zig to bootstrap Nix for LLVM. | 04:02:48 | |
| what is the benefit of using zig than just using llvm to bootstrap itself like what is done in freebsd and darwin? | 04:27:39 | |
| * what is the benefit of using zig than just using llvm to bootstrap itself like what is done in freebsd and darwin? or gcc like is done on linux | 04:29:13 | |
In reply to @paparodeo:matrix.orgZig prebuilds are a static binary with Clang statically linked in so more of convenience | 04:45:34 | |