| 14 May 2026 |
 emily | I did | 15:28:51 |
| emily | I listed my findings in the original issue | 15:29:03 |
| emily | but pinged because it seemed possible I missed something since I'm not super savvy with the infra repo and don't have access to the secrets to see what format they take | 15:29:33 |
| emily | the secret had Hydra in the name and I checked that the Hydra code was doing it right (with other Hydra secrets I guess). didn't correlate it with the channel scripts that looked like they'd just be using an SSH key | 15:30:35 |
 hexa | infra call in 30m | 15:31:24 |
| hexa | no worries, emily | 15:31:49 |
| hexa | https://github.com/NixOS/infra/pull/1033 | 15:33:55 |
| hexa | at least the git* secrets look clean | 15:45:48 |
| hexa | they're not random pats | 15:46:00 |
| hexa | https://meet.cccda.de/nix-osin-fra | 15:53:25 |
| hexa | We enabled Intelligent Tiering on the cache.nixos.org S3 bucket. The idea is that we'll save money by moving older objects to lower storing tiers "intelligently". We'll check back in a month to evaluate the update cost structure. | 16:47:51 |
| hexa | Redacted or Malformed Event | 16:48:01 |
| hexa | $ git remote update origin >&2
Fetching origin
From https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs
* [new branch] backport-518430-to-release-25.11 -> origin/backport-518430-to-release-25.11
7f1371b3a6db..3054723ea2b1 master -> origin/master
625b14ada4b3..aa8faea6d577 python-updates -> origin/python-updates
fbc1b6e6d1ad..503504ad2d36 release-25.11 -> origin/release-25.11
997d0d965a30..0b1741a3bf36 staging -> origin/staging
e81ce22cc447..2a7e5c6f1f46 staging-next -> origin/staging-next
ec5490bc79b6..2a49f0d42ca9 staging-nixos -> origin/staging-nixos
$ git push origin 54a8ef403e0b27e1eed0298f92e8d3cb863c968a:refs/heads/nixos-25.11-small >&2
fatal: could not read Username for 'https://github.com': No such device or address
Command failed with code (128) errno (0).
| 22:38:38 |
| hexa | welp | 22:38:45 |
| hexa | https://seashells.io/v/TrBcrEvC | 22:40:30 |
| hexa | ok, we're good | 22:41:36 |
| 15 May 2026 |
| hexa | in 2 minutes | 10:22:54 |
| hexa | gabyx doesn't look like it reproduces | 10:26:44 |
| hexa | https://photon.codes/blog/we-found-a-ticking-time-bomb-in-macos-tcp-networking 🤷 | 10:27:29 |
| hexa | yeah, no. it does repro. | 10:29:22 |
| hexa | rebooting | 10:31:32 |
| hexa | 
Download excessive swapping fixed | 10:36:26 |
| hexa | 
Download and disk space recovery too | 10:37:26 |
| hexa | the outliers are the ofborg macs, which provide a good comparison | 10:37:36 |
| 16 May 2026 |
 VladimÃr ÄŒunát | I now canceled the rest of the last nixos-unstable eval in order to make that channel move. Again.
The critical set has passed and all packages get cached via a nixpkgs eval on the exactly same commit. The problem is that those thousands of other jobs would probably take Hydra lots of time to complete (I'd estimate a day or two of work), slowing other important stuff - like the NixOS 26.05 release consequently, probably. And completing them wouldn't bring singificant value, I believe.
| 13:38:33 |
| emily | non-channel-blocking NixOS tests? | 13:41:58 |
| VladimÃr ÄŒunát | Yes, that's the main part which will be missing on that eval. | 13:42:28 |
| emily | IMO, we should consider if building all of those on Hydra really makes sense. there's no notification when they regress. if they're for package maintainers they can be passthru.tests that Hydra ignores | 13:42:57 |
| emily | some of them should probably be blocking, but spending a lot of time building the rest seems questionable? | 13:43:21 |
| VladimÃr ÄŒunát | The current price/value ratio isn't great. I agree with that. | 13:43:57 |
