| 26 May 2025 |
 @trofi:matrix.org | but having an llvm-only bootstrap would be a good test if it's easy to make a componentized-gcc bootstrap | 21:07:09 |
| @trofi:matrix.org | (i think it's very much not easy, but you already know that) | 21:07:33 |
 Tristan Ross | Yeah | 21:08:44 |
| Tristan Ross | I've already been looking into things to make it possible | 21:08:54 |
| Tristan Ross | One of the reasons why I've been working on fixing up pkgsLLVM | 21:09:11 |
| Tristan Ross | More things that work there, the better they'll work natively | 21:09:24 |
| Tristan Ross | Plus, I'll run native LLVM once it's possible | 21:09:35 |
| Tristan Ross | Rebuild the world on Ampere with 128 cores. | 21:09:50 |
 Grimmauld (any/all) | before i do that i want proper tooling to not do world rebuilds whenever i poke at some low-level dep... | 21:10:30 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | i suppose thatn is on nix, not stdenv... | 21:10:45 |
| @trofi:matrix.org | Yeah, nix does not give you an easy way to graft a low-level dependency. | 21:11:48 |
 emily | In reply to @rosscomputerguy:matrix.org
I know not everyone is available for calls which is why I made a doc. I think a mixture of async + sync is good. We can all be on the same page with the design doc while some of us are doing a call to pair up and blaze through things. I'm not sure how we're meant to work together as a team when IIRC every single other member present agreed that sync calls don't suit their availability... if the vast majority of the team can't make the calls then we can't make collective decisions on them as a team, so either it won't actually be able to move design/decisions forward or it'll just be pushing things through without consensus. | 21:22:01 |
| emily | even if we had the collective availability for it it's very hard to schedule sync calls across a distributed international team on a regular basis unless there's consistent availability at specific times | 21:22:45 |
| emily | which is not really realistic when we are all working as volunteers and have communicated the constraints on our time and how we can best collaborate effectively under them... | 21:23:15 |
| Tristan Ross | I understand that part, at least Ericson and I are able to work together on pairing up together and we can work async with the rest of the team. | 21:24:50 |
| Tristan Ross | Ericson and I are going to work on some libc improvements soon. After I come back from Florida, I'll be splitting GCC up. | 21:26:39 |
| Tristan Ross | I did work on https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/409851 for almost a week now and it's almost in a good state. | 21:28:08 |
| 28 May 2025 |
|  陈浩南 joined the room. | 11:33:28 |
| 陈浩南 | I found that in current nixos-unstable, gcc.cc is not gcc14.cc. But I could not find out where makes the difference. | 11:34:22 |
| 陈浩南 | Redacted or Malformed Event | 11:34:47 |
| 陈浩南 | This is my nix repl history:
nix-repl> :lf github:NixOS/nixpkgs/nixos-unstable
Added 17 variables.
nix-repl> outputs.legacyPackages.x86_64-linux.gcc.cc
«derivation /nix/store/sjzbql9ja7p7c08ziagba11cnvj6lsz9-gcc-14.2.1.20250322.drv»
nix-repl> outputs.legacyPackages.x86_64-linux.gcc14.cc
«derivation /nix/store/f3gx5c6q45nsskjyx451amqmzyvasr90-gcc-14.2.1.20250322.drv»
| 11:35:36 |
 K900 | Why is this important? | 11:35:54 |
| 陈浩南 | I am trying to make intel fortran compiler working on NixOS 25.05. It used to work on NixOS 24.11, but now on 25.05, the intel fortran compiler complains could not find gcc installation directory. | 11:37:32 |
| K900 | What is the package name? | 11:37:41 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | just you wait until you realize stdenv.cc and gcc14Stdenv.cc are different yet again | 11:38:25 |
| 陈浩南 | The Intel compilers is not packaged in nixpkgs. It defined here https://github.com/CHN-beta/bscpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/intel-oneapi/2023.nix | 11:39:05 |
| 陈浩南 | So why? | 11:39:16 |
| 陈浩南 | Where is the code that make difference? | 11:39:32 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | some wrapping magic deep in stdenv, but probably not relevant to your issues anyways | 11:40:14 |
