| 2 Aug 2025 |
 magic_rb | rather nixng, i need environment.etc for nixos compatibility reasons | 11:25:35 |
 emily | yeah I just mean | 11:25:44 |
| emily | you should just crib that implementation | 11:25:51 |
| emily | it's much better than the Perl nonsense | 11:25:59 |
| emily | and pretty generic | 11:26:06 |
| magic_rb | overlays dont work in containers | 11:26:07 |
| magic_rb | so its not useful | 11:26:12 |
| emily | they should in a mount namespace? | 11:26:22 |
| magic_rb | if you docker run it wont | 11:26:35 |
| magic_rb | im pretty sure | 11:26:43 |
| magic_rb | (and anyway, i wanna write my own for fun and profit) | 11:27:01 |
| emily | I think they should if you give the container a userns which you should probably do for isolation anyway l | 11:27:24 |
| emily | but sure :) | 11:27:27 |
| magic_rb | my goal with this is starting with replacing much of the shell script non sense in nixng with small haskell binaries | 11:28:11 |
| magic_rb | been planning to do that for a while | 11:28:17 |
| magic_rb | with UPX on top, it goes from 3.6MB to 700KB | 11:29:53 |
| magic_rb | nice | 11:29:54 |
| magic_rb | we shold have a UPX post build hook thing | 11:30:16 |
| magic_rb | this is actually nice, writeHaskell actually creates a equally small binary | 11:48:02 |
|  @froggymoded:matrix.org left the room. | 18:13:15 |
| 3 Aug 2025 |
 sterni (he/him) | MangoIV: will you need htree for GHC < 9.10 going forward? | 10:39:36 |
 MangoIV | No. this is intended.. Thank you for pining but since this has come up the second time now, I think I'm registered for maintainer, let me just fix it if it breaks in the future. :) | 10:41:18 |
| MangoIV | (don't want you to be blocked on things like this :3) | 10:41:32 |
| sterni (he/him) | MangoIV: well we're far from blocking on anything, I was just cleaning up some stuff | 10:50:39 |
| sterni (he/him) | Would be great if someone could look into this since there is no known fix yet https://github.com/typeclasses/chell/issues/5 | 10:50:54 |
|  prescientmoon changed their display name from Adriel to prescientmoon. | 14:31:42 |
| 4 Aug 2025 |
 Marc Jakobi | Has anyone else noticed a significant increase in memory when compiling Haskell packages with ghc 9.8.4 compared to ghc 9.6.6? I haven't been able to pinpoint it yet and I can't reproduce it outside of nix builds. | 09:45:42 |
 ners | Does this happen on the same nixpkgs pin, e.g. nix build nixpkgs#haskell.packages.ghc984.rhine vs nix build nixpkgs#haskell.packages.ghc966.rhine? | 10:09:07 |
| Marc Jakobi | In reply to @ners:nixos.dev
Does this happen on the same nixpkgs pin, e.g. nix build nixpkgs#haskell.packages.ghc984.rhine vs nix build nixpkgs#haskell.packages.ghc966.rhine? It doesn't even happen for all packages. I'm trying to build the same package with ghc 9.6, but it's failing to build singletons-th (or singletons-th_3_5), which is one of the dependencies - which kind of adds to my suspicion that this may be a template-haskell regression. | 14:28:51 |
| Marc Jakobi | Yep, no matter how I try to override or jailbreak packages, I can't seem escape dependency hell if I use another ghc version. | 15:13:23 |
