| 19 Apr 2025 |
 alexfmpe | shouldn't it, like, not try to eval? | 16:22:30 |
 maralorn | Well the problem is that it has a dependency which doesn't eval. | 16:26:10 |
| maralorn | So the correct solution seems to be to restrict the plattforms of miso-action-logger if that's factually correct. | 16:27:09 |
| alexfmpe | but they are? | 16:27:32 |
| alexfmpe | the error message says so | 16:27:43 |
| alexfmpe | building locally I also get
a) To temporarily allow packages that are unsupported for this system, you can use an environment variable
for a single invocation of the nix tools.
$ export NIXPKGS_ALLOW_UNSUPPORTED_SYSTEM=1
| 16:28:04 |
| maralorn | In reply to @alexfmpe:matrix.org
but they are? No, the error message is showing a part of the ghcjs-base derivation. The miso-action-logger derivation has no restrictions. | 16:31:32 |
| alexfmpe | oooh | 16:31:44 |
| maralorn | I wonder if we have to null ghcjs-base or something... | 16:32:22 |
| alexfmpe | I'll try a few things | 16:32:50 |
| alexfmpe | IIRC miso itself didn't build for native in nixpkgs until recently, because cabal would find no libraries or anything after going through the conditionals | 16:33:33 |
| alexfmpe | it just built for me now though, technically was cached | 16:33:53 |
| alexfmpe | think that was changed by the 1.8.7 release | 16:34:13 |
| alexfmpe | not enough because the package always unconditionally declares the dependency and imports from it | 16:37:43 |
| alexfmpe | https://github.com/Lermex/miso-action-logger/issues/1 | 16:38:02 |
| alexfmpe | I'll just flag as ghcjs only | 16:38:08 |
| alexfmpe | someone put up a PR for this on large-records just 2 hours ago, but still needs sanity check so I'm not leaning towards even applying as patch until it's reviewed
I don't think we should block merge to staging on it, can just be PR'd directly to staging if upstream rubber stamps without an immediate release? | 16:45:09 |
| alexfmpe |
https://github.com/well-typed/large-records/pull/171 | 16:45:16 |
| alexfmpe | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/400121 | 16:54:25 |
| alexfmpe | hey we broke 400k | 16:54:29 |
 sterni (he/him) | agree & agree & agree | 18:40:27 |
| alexfmpe changed their profile picture. | 23:55:28 |
| 20 Apr 2025 |
| maralorn | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
the 23rd is the nominal breaking change deadline and I assume there are breaking changes here If no one else does, I will finalize our merge on Tuesday. | 23:03:04 |
| 21 Apr 2025 |
|  @megmug:matrix.org left the room. | 11:25:41 |
| 22 Apr 2025 |
| sterni (he/him) | I'm currently finishing the broken list and am going to merge after that. | 08:52:40 |
| sterni (he/him) | Any further fixes can probably relatively easily be done on staging(-next) | 08:52:56 |
| sterni (he/him) | * I'm currently finishing the broken list and am going to merge after that. Going to take a minute since I manually need to check the queued jobs. | 08:53:20 |
 hellwolf | hurray!
I would invite everyone to have a second look at the diff of 1909d9a. We can still fix packages that are worth fixing on staging (within reason, i.e. another hackage bump on there is rather difficult).
pkgs/development/haskell-modules/configuration-hackage2nix/broken.yaml: "+450-19"
Am I reading right that there are 400+ more borken packages because of the 9.8?
| 10:15:10 |
| hellwolf | https://github.com/cdepillabout/nix-haskell-updates-status
"Top 50 broken packages, sorted by number of reverse dependencies"
Is this the place to start to look for the culprits? | 10:17:02 |
 @malteneuss:matrix.org | Manually applying patches and fixing builds for weeks doesn't seem sustainable. If you have the time and haven't done so, please voice your opinion in Discourse on what has to change in GHC and/or Haskell ecosystem upstream to reduce the churn, e.g.
https://discourse.haskell.org/t/language-library-and-compiler-stability-moved-from-ghc-9-6-migration-guide/5745/92 (GHC stability/backwards compatibility)
https://discourse.haskell.org/t/introducing-the-haskell-foundation-stability-working-group/11743 (GHC stability/backwards compatibility)
https://discourse.haskell.org/t/how-much-effort-does-backwards-compatibility-require-from-library-authors/11584 (Haskell ecosystem stability/backwards compatibility)
https://discourse.haskell.org/t/request-for-comment-cabal-freeze-doesnt-produce-a-lock-file/11374 (Real Cabal lock files like e.g. Rust) | 11:00:23 |
