| 19 Sep 2025 |
 maralorn | I mean it’s generally much more likely that this is to due to differences in a specific package. But I remember vaguely that we merged something related to ghcWithPackages in the last months. | 11:12:26 |
 bglgwyng | Could you share the commit ref please? I want to compare before and after. | 11:13:43 |
| maralorn | Huh, er maybe we didn’t merge it and it was just a PR. | 11:13:50 |
| bglgwyng | Hm... then now I am going to start binary search over then lol | 11:14:20 |
| maralorn | Huh, I can’t find anything that makes sense. | 11:16:13 |
| maralorn | Could be d3e4f784aa1bb95ad8a13cadc7073e6617658f2f, but seems highly unlikely. | 11:16:32 |
| maralorn | Good luck with that. I find it somehow very satisfying to do that even though it takes much time. It’s so cool when the power of the logarithm works for you. 😄 | 11:17:36 |
 sterni | In reply to @bglgwyng:matrix.org
it seems generic-builder runs Setup.hs to build cabal packages. yes, that’s Cabal | 13:12:37 |
 Wolfgang Walther | @sterni @maralorn it looks like the next staging-next cycle will start this weekend. Do you think we're close enough with the current iteration to catch that? I think it would make sense to still give this major update a bit of exposure on unstable, before we hit the freeze. We will certainly have at least one more staging cycle after that, but until that hits master, we're really close to release already. WDYT? | 18:38:49 |
| Wolfgang Walther | * sterni maralorn it looks like the next staging-next cycle will start this weekend. Do you think we're close enough with the current iteration to catch that? I think it would make sense to still give this major update a bit of exposure on unstable, before we hit the freeze. We will certainly have at least one more staging cycle after that, but until that hits master, we're really close to release already. WDYT? | 18:39:16 |
| sterni | I feel like it’s possible yeah, especially since we can still fix stuff on staging | 18:42:37 |
| sterni | should maybe look at the broken list as of right now | 18:42:57 |
| Wolfgang Walther | Are you going to give the new blazing fast script a run or should I? | 18:43:37 |
| sterni | feel free to I’m obly on the phone at the moment | 18:44:27 |
| sterni | * feel free to I’m only on the phone at the moment | 18:44:34 |
| Wolfgang Walther | will do.. and put it in a PR at first, so that we can just have a look for now. | 18:47:19 |
| maralorn | I think I haven’t made it through all my packages. I think especially hls should really work on all versions. But it seems fair to put a bit pressure on that because I had enough time already. | 18:52:55 |
| Wolfgang Walther | I fixed some easy ones of yours yesterday, but not HLS :D | 18:53:50 |
| 20 Sep 2025 |
| Wolfgang Walther | List in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/444422, we should merge before "either tonight or tomorrow", when staging-next will be created. | 09:59:00 |
| sterni | I’ll make a list of packages I’d want to fix on staging-next and then merge it later | 11:17:05 |
| maralorn | Wolfgang Walther: sterni Who wants to answer on https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/444721? I think the main point is that we will achieve the switch to 9.10 and have no blockers. Right? | 19:10:34 |
| 21 Sep 2025 |
| bglgwyng | I found that 7479392276eede7c7cb89abf1693e8ef9ae5aebd fixed the issue | 05:25:55 |
| bglgwyng | but it's just a stackage snapshot update, so there's a problem in my package override logic. | 05:26:22 |
| bglgwyng | I did 10+ python3, ghc build for 1 day bisecting between 60,000 commits lol | 05:27:01 |
| bglgwyng | https://github.com/bglgwyng/nix-x-cabal/blob/main/modules/cabal-project.nix#L181
I build configured packages and put them into the package db by using ghcWithPackage.
Is is safe way to do it? Do we have a more lower level function to build package db?
| 05:50:13 |
| bglgwyng | * https://github.com/bglgwyng/nix-x-cabal/blob/main/modules/cabal-project.nix#L181
I build configured packages in plan.json and put them into the package db by using ghcWithPackage.
Is is safe way to do it? Do we have a more lower level function to build package db?
| 05:50:22 |
| Wolfgang Walther | We had planned to look at Template Haskell in pkgsStatic for this release cycle and I feel that we really shouldn't push this out much further. The gap between pkgsStatic with GHC 9.4 and default with GHC 9.10 is widening now. I think we should discuss how to proceed here first, before deciding on whether we have any blockers or not. | 07:46:43 |
| maralorn | I just tried to run nixpkgs-review unix2dos PR and got 23k builds. I feel like I am holding it wrong. | 08:17:58 |
 Puna | if you're using local evaluation to get the list of rebuilds, try applying this patch: https://github.com/Mic92/nixpkgs-review/commit/558b6d4da3032bb43c396d6042c41681ac2b9408 | 08:22:09 |
| sterni | maralorn: sounds about right | 08:23:02 |
