| 22 Jun 2023 |
 Arian | Cursed | 18:45:02 |
| Arian | Absolutely cursed | 18:45:05 |
 @lily:lily.flowers | Ugh still trying to root out that one issue in between $dayjob stuff. I'm taking a break now, but I'll come back to it later. It's an interesting and cursed issue for sure | 20:43:47 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | ElvishJerricco: Should we go ahead and merge https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/237820 and https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/237823 or were you wanting more reviews on them? (or if anyone else here wants to review that is of course welcome) | 20:44:24 |
 @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | that's a lot of stuff I wasn't paying attention to in here today :P | 20:44:34 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | I think it's fine to merge both of those | 20:45:25 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | In reply to @lily:lily.flowers
Ugh still trying to root out that one issue in between $dayjob stuff. I'm taking a break now, but I'll come back to it later. It's an interesting and cursed issue for sure any chance of a quick summary so I don't have to read all that scrollback for context? | 20:46:18 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | In reply to @elvishjerricco:matrix.org
any chance of a quick summary so I don't have to read all that scrollback for context? 9pfs over virtio can apparently be mounted too quickly before the virtio channels have populated. It's not a problem with slow, serial scripted stage-1 but is a problem with systemd-initrd when using a sysroot without a backing device (i.e. tmpfs) which would otherwise wait for enough dev stuff to settle before attempting to mount | 20:48:30 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | Haven't rooted out the exact thing it's relying on that isn't available, but you can replicate it with this config in a NixOS test:
{
virtualisation.diskImage = null;
boot.initrd.systemd.enable = true;
}
| 20:49:51 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org |
before the virtio channels have populated
Guess I don't know enough about virtio to know what this means
| 20:50:15 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | (if you add a sleep prior to sysroot.mount or prior to the 9pfs mounts, then they work fine...) | 20:50:28 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | In reply to @elvishjerricco:matrix.org
before the virtio channels have populated
Guess I don't know enough about virtio to know what this means
Like the communication channels between VM and host. It uses 9pfs over one of those channels to mount the host nix store | 20:51:17 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | so I guess the tl;dr is that if a 9p mount unit starts too early, some stuff isn't ready for it and everything breaks | 20:51:38 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | Yep | 20:51:42 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | 9p mount over virtio, but yeah | 20:51:55 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | interesting | 20:52:14 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | (I doubt it's a case for 9p in general. But it's not like that FS gets used for anything but networked filesystems, so 🤷♀️) | 20:52:18 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | * (I doubt it's the case for 9p in general. But it's not like that FS gets used for anything but networked filesystems, so 🤷♀️) | 20:52:23 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | wonder if there's anything resembling a device unit to indicate that things are ready | 20:52:27 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | That's what I was trying to probe for | 20:52:36 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | I'll have more info later after poking for longer. I'm taking a break now though | 20:53:07 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | yea, thanks for looking into this | 20:53:22 |
| @lily:lily.flowers | I do always love debugging cursed stuff (/s, mostly) | 20:53:55 |
 @nikstur:matrix.org | Lily Foster: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CADYN=9KXWCA-pi8VCS5r_JScsuRyWBEKqtdBFCAGzg1vq4M5FQ@mail.gmail.com/ this seems related. Can't make much of it alone though | 21:46:12 |
| 24 Jun 2023 |
|  @kadawee:cat.casa joined the room. | 15:59:52 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | responding to a new issue about tpm stuff, this has got to be the most terrible predicate I've ever written:
nonRedundant = { systemd, full, cryptsetup, luks, tpm2, fido2, ... }:
((luks || tpm2 || fido2) -> cryptsetup)
&& (!systemd -> (!(tpm2 || fido2 || full) && (cryptsetup -> luks)));
| 23:36:43 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | I don't even know what it means anymore | 23:36:50 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | I think it translates to "if we have luks, tpm, or fido, then we don't actually care unless we have cryptsetup too. But also, if we're not even doing systemd initrd, then tpm, fido, and full systemd aren't important, but cryptsetup is but only if we also have luks" | 23:39:22 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | like wut | 23:39:25 |
 emily | sometimes a non-normalized/golfed boolean expression is more readable :) | 23:52:13 |
