| 4 Aug 2025 |
 Teo (he/him) | Ah annoying! | 16:56:45 |
 oak 🏳️🌈♥️ | Is it possible to ignore specific testcases when packaging a Haskell package, instead of disabling all the tests with dontCheck? With overrideCabal? | 19:03:10 |
| oak 🏳️🌈♥️ | Found a solution, modify testFlags through overrideCabal | 21:09:34 |
| 5 Aug 2025 |
 Marc Jakobi | I think I've narrowed the high memory consumption down to the use of inline-python's marshalling functions (fromPy, ...).
Will investigate further... | 06:59:22 |
| Marc Jakobi | It's not inline-python either. But I can work around it by disabling library profiling, which probably explains why I wasn't able to reproduce it outside of nix. | 09:48:07 |
|  Fargate joined the room. | 12:44:58 |
|  @fargate-official:matrix.org left the room. | 12:45:33 |
| Marc Jakobi | It's a combination of library profiling + template haskell in large modules (500 LOC). Please don't ask me why we have modules with ~500 LOC 🙈 | 13:39:15 |
 magic_rb | 500 loc is not that much? Id think | 13:39:53 |
| magic_rb | If you said 5000loc then sure | 13:40:00 |
| Marc Jakobi | I don't know how much the TH is adding to those lines | 13:44:38 |
| magic_rb | Ah right, lots of TH | 13:44:56 |
| Teo (he/him) | You can use https://downloads.haskell.org/ghc/latest/docs/users_guide/debugging.html#ghc-flag-ddump-splices if you want to see the stuff TH outputs | 14:07:00 |
 sterni (he/him) | you should also probably try to figure out whether GHC or the linker is the problem | 14:44:05 |
| 6 Aug 2025 |
|  Mikel Pérez changed their profile picture. | 02:53:36 |
| 7 Aug 2025 |
|  J. Ryan Stinnett joined the room. | 13:34:41 |
| 8 Aug 2025 |
|  0x4A6F joined the room. | 06:54:24 |
| sterni (he/him) | teo (they/he): is there an issue alreday for the issue that finalStage = Stage2 is silently ignored? | 10:06:06 |
| Teo (he/him) | Not as far as I know. it would be good to make one | 10:07:18 |
| Teo (he/him) | even if there is one, it would put it back on folks' radar | 10:07:32 |
| sterni (he/him) | https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/26289 | 10:45:58 |
| sterni (he/him) | let's try this again https://discourse.nixos.org/t/call-for-contributions-we-are-updating-to-ghc-9-10-2/67756 (lmk about any typos) | 11:36:01 |
| sterni (he/him) | funny that we did 9.2, 9.4, 9.6 and 9.8 without ever posting on discourse | 11:36:26 |
| sterni (he/him) | though 8.10 -> 9.0 truly was the big one | 11:36:36 |
| sterni (he/him) | I'm a bit concerned people will be scared away by this wall of text, but I'm the wrong person to write a short post. Also documentation on contributing to haskellPackages is really spotty. | 11:38:41 |
| sterni (he/him) | The short intro I wrote (and copied here) for 9.0.2 post is kinda good, maybe we should just put that in the Nixpkgs manual as a starting point. | 11:39:11 |
 chreekat | It's an excellent post | 11:59:28 |
|  @selkie-diligent-61ad45186da03739848be880:gitter.im left the room. | 13:55:04 |
 emily | has anyone noticed a GHC build hanging around building ghc-9.8.4 (buildPhase): | Run Ghc CompileCWithGhc Stage1: rts/Hash.c => _build/stage1/rts/build/c/Hash.thr_debug_dyn_o with a bunch of C compilers using all the CPU they can find overnight but seemingly not progressing | 14:11:44 |
| emily | (I suspect the answer is no and this is an LLVM 21 regression but I thought I'd check) | 14:11:53 |
