!RbXGJhHMsnQcNIDFWN:nixos.org

Haskell in Nixpkgs/NixOS

722 Members
For discussions and questions about Haskell with Nix, cabal2nix and haskellPackages in nixpkgs | Current Docs: https://haskell4nix.readthedocs.io/ | More Nix: #community:nixos.org | More Haskell: #haskell-space:matrix.org145 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
24 Apr 2025
@maralorn:maralorn.demaralornBut otherwise you can probably get by by just adding the dependencies like I described.14:57:12
@dragospe:matrix.orgPeter Dragosgreat. I'll give it a go, thank you!14:58:54
@dragospe:matrix.orgPeter DragosWorked great!15:30:28
@scm:sven.ccscm left the room.18:41:45
25 Apr 2025
@relichunter:nitro.chatrelichunter joined the room.05:19:55
@nrs-status:matrix.orgthirdofmay18081814goyaAnyone have thoughts on nixpkgs default haskell infrastructure vs haskell.nix?13:51:55
@nrs-status:matrix.orgthirdofmay18081814goyaIs it usecase dependent or does anyone have a preference13:52:08
@toonn:matrix.orgtoonn If you want to upstream things into Nixpkgs, use Nixpkgs infra, otherwise I prefer haskell.nix. 13:56:28
@toonn:matrix.orgtoonn It is almost just have a Cabal or Stack setup and a tiny Nix wrapper that hardly changes between projects. 13:57:12
@teoc:matrix.orgTeo (he/him)haskell.nix has pretty bad performance in my experience13:57:36
@toonn:matrix.orgtoonn I use it on a Core2Duo from a decade ago. 13:58:05
@toonn:matrix.orgtoonn It's heavier than the Nixpkgs infra though, that's certainly true. But that's because it does so much more. 13:58:46
@nrs-status:matrix.orgthirdofmay18081814goyahm I see ty for comments15:06:24
@nrs-status:matrix.orgthirdofmay18081814goyaguess it can't hurt to try both (except for the time expense lol)15:06:37
@maralorn:maralorn.demaralornThe two main advantages I see in haskell.nix are clean derivations for cross-plattform and non-default flags and the possibility to consume a cabal/stack generated build plan. Both of those features I would really want upstreamed into cabal2nix. imo, however if you can get your builds to build without them it is probably not worth the overhead. You are depending on nixpkgs anyway.15:16:12
@maralorn:maralorn.demaralornMy impression is that haskell.nix is a good fit for larger projects/companies where reliably targeting many plattforms is a requirement, it is unrealistic for every team member to be well-versed in the manual dependency resolution dance of nixpkgs, caching is a non-issue because they need their own cache anyway and upstreaming is not a priority.15:20:20
@maralorn:maralorn.demaralorn* My impression is that haskell.nix is a better fit for larger projects/companies where reliably targeting many plattforms is a requirement, it is unrealistic for every team member to be well-versed in the manual dependency resolution dance of nixpkgs, caching is a non-issue because they need their own cache anyway and upstreaming is not a priority.15:20:51
@maralorn:maralorn.demaralornBut I have not actually used haskell.nix a lot.15:21:25
@toonn:matrix.orgtoonn The Nixpkgs infra makes it hard to pick versions of deps. That applies for small projects more than large projects, IMO. 15:25:28
@nrs-status:matrix.orgthirdofmay18081814goyahm I see15:39:30
@nrs-status:matrix.orgthirdofmay18081814goyalots to read and test out heheh, tyvm for comments15:39:42
@aleksana:mozilla.orgaleksana 🏳️‍⚧️ (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC) joined the room.15:39:50
@shapr:cofree.coffeeshaprWe used haskell.nix when I worked at SimSpace. We had one employee who spent all their time on the nix toolchain things. It was worth it!15:41:10
@shapr:cofree.coffeeshaprFor my own use, stock nixpkgs is fine 99% of the time.15:41:25
26 Apr 2025
@aleksana:mozilla.orgaleksana 🏳️‍⚧️ (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC)I'm trying to build our haskell ecosystem part in Nixpkgs on loongarch64. loongarch64 support of haskell is only available after ghc>=9.12 and llvm>=18. Currently our default is ghc 9.6 and llvm 15.03:54:06
@aleksana:mozilla.orgaleksana 🏳️‍⚧️ (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC)There are two issues here, the less significant issue is that I need to change the default ghc version to 9.12, but I don't know how compatible our stackage is with this version.03:55:29
@aleksana:mozilla.orgaleksana 🏳️‍⚧️ (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC)The bigger issue is that I can't rely on 9.10 to compile 9.12, like we do now, so I should package a binary distribution of 9.12, but upstream does not publish binary distribution built for loongarch64.03:56:56
@aleksana:mozilla.orgaleksana 🏳️‍⚧️ (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC)Oh, there's hadrian bootstrap source, but upstream only publishes 9.8 and 9.1004:01:30
@aleksana:mozilla.orgaleksana 🏳️‍⚧️ (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC)Wait, seems like the support is older than I got, I just have to get a set of patches04:10:25
@aleksana:mozilla.orgaleksana 🏳️‍⚧️ (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC)
In reply to @aleksana:mozilla.org
Oh, there's hadrian bootstrap source, but upstream only publishes 9.8 and 9.10
It's not ghc with hc files generated 😣
04:38:25

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6