| 25 Sep 2025 |
 sterni (he/him) | so you need to make sure that the splitmix version is consistent as well | 11:58:33 |
 bglgwyng | ah, I'll figure out why 2 random packages are built, but in my case, build with duplicated packages should work well since I explicitly override them by plan.json result | 11:59:48 |
| bglgwyng | I suppose that we don't have force generic-builder to use a specific package with id | 12:00:43 |
| bglgwyng | * I suppose that we don't have a way to force generic-builder to use a specific package with id | 12:01:26 |
 maralorn | I think Setup.hs has a mode to do that. But we currently don’t use it in the generic-builder and it might be non trivial. | 12:02:16 |
| bglgwyng | Thanks! but, wht does 'non trivial' mean here? | 12:03:04 |
| maralorn | It means, that it could be that a) if you do this you need to specify the hashes of all dependencies (and I think in that mode you disable bound checking completely) and b) it might be hard to figure out the correct hashes to inject there. Basically we would be reimplementing logic which we currently rely on from Setup.hs. | 12:12:26 |
| maralorn | Does not sound insurmantable. | 12:12:47 |
| maralorn | It might even be feasible do improve the generic-builder to enforce the usage of passed in overrides more reliably in general. That could be cool. | 12:13:28 |
| maralorn | * Does not sound insurmountable. | 12:13:43 |
| sterni (he/him) | https://cabal.readthedocs.io/en/stable/setup-commands.html#cmdoption-runhaskell-Setup.hs-configure-dependency | 15:26:31 |
| maralorn | Ah, nice. | 15:27:13 |
| maralorn | That’s less complicated than what I had in mind. | 15:27:28 |
| sterni (he/him) | I think the problem here is figuring out the right installed package identifier. I believe how this is computed is pretty much internal to Cabal | 15:27:35 |
| maralorn | You can most certainly not know it a nix eval time. So you will probably need to do some finding through build inputs. | 15:28:33 |
