| 12 Dec 2024 |
 Tristan Ross | Check the wiki | 18:37:49 |
| Tristan Ross | I've done nix develop nixpkgs#llvmPackages.clang | 18:38:16 |
| Tristan Ross | And that's worked before. | 18:38:22 |
 truby | I tried what was on the wiki and it didn't work for some reason, but now that I think of it that might have been flang not supporting -B... :) | 18:38:52 |
| truby | guess that's on me to fix if it's still true... | 18:39:50 |
| truby | I think most of these are referring to "classic" flang, which is a completely different compiler with the same name. It's not at all confusing and never causes any issues for us. 😃 | 18:40:41 |
 p14 | In reply to @rosscomputerguy:matrix.org
And that's worked before. That's fine for building clang, but if you subsequently try to use the built clang, it won't work well because it's not wrapped. | 19:22:21 |
| p14 | I'm not sure I've seen nixpkgs have a good answer to this. I think what's needed is a way of dumping the flags needed somewhere (e.g. to find the C/C++ stdlib) that the development compiler can pick up. My method is to use NIX_DEBUG on some other compiler and dump them into a clang{,++}.cfg next to my development compiler. | 19:23:28 |
| p14 | Which is a little fragile since there aren't GC roots for those references, but it seems to work well enough for my purposes as a development environment. | 19:23:56 |
 Philip Taron (UTC-8) | I filled it in. Did you see the draft I posted earlier? | 19:45:57 |
 Randy Eckenrode | I need to add my availability, though it’s probably a bit limited. | 19:46:53 |
| Tristan Ross | What draft? | 19:55:09 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Hold on, rather than linking the Matrix message I'll just make a pad. | 20:05:31 |
| Tristan Ross | Alright | 20:05:45 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | https://pad.lassul.us/gYaWH4LuQGeED_BUSGInQA | 20:25:19 |
| Tristan Ross | Looks good | 20:26:02 |
| truby | Tristan Ross: da67096a3b9bf56a91d16901293e51ba5b49a27e is my nixpkgs rev. Still hitting the gettext failure | 20:29:04 |
| Tristan Ross | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/da67096a3b9bf56a91d16901293e51ba5b49a27e | 20:29:36 |
 Artturin | the bump is not yet in master https://nixpk.gs/pr-tracker.html?pr=358254 | 20:29:43 |
| truby | hm | 20:29:44 |
| Artturin | while the removal is | 20:29:45 |
| Artturin | was submitted agaisnt master | 20:29:50 |
| truby | I'm probably misunderstanding the flake file format | 20:29:56 |
| truby | ah, yep. bc27f0fde01ce4e1bfec1ab122d72b7380278e68 sorry | 20:30:10 |
| Tristan Ross | Yeah, Artturin is right. That rev doesn't have it yet. | 20:31:15 |
| truby | that rev is from 3 days ago though? | 20:31:38 |
| Artturin | the bump is in staging | 20:31:53 |
| Artturin | not yet in master | 20:31:56 |
| truby | ah ok. Anything I can do to work around that? "just use staging"? :) | 20:32:19 |
| truby | If this was fixed before in master and the fix was removed for a version bump, why is the removal of the fix in master while the fix is still in staging? Sorry if this is a naieve question 😅 | 20:35:29 |
