!UKDpaKNNsBpOPfLWfX:zhaofeng.li

Colmena

330 Members
A simple, stateless NixOS deployment tool - https://github.com/zhaofengli/colmena116 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
17 Jan 2023
@rttti:matrix.org@rttti:matrix.org left the room.21:00:42
18 Jan 2023
@fabianhjr:matrix.orgFabián Heredia joined the room.04:01:55
@yuu:matrix.orgYuu Yin changed their display name from yuu to Yuu Yin.13:42:13
21 Jan 2023
@cw:kernelpanic.cafeChinchilla Washington changed their display name from Chinchilla Washington to Christan Wildaire.08:54:35
@cw:kernelpanic.cafeChinchilla Washington changed their display name from Christan Wildaire to Chinchilla Washington.18:25:53
25 Jan 2023
@askyourself:askyourself.caAsk Yourself🍉

I'm getting this error message when I try to update my flake, seems to be coming from Colmena, anybody know what's up?

error: builder for '/nix/store/k3yr2cb5dwvmaffylyrx4f87y8la6haf-nix-eval-jobs-2.9.0-colmena.drv' failed with exit code 1;
       last 10 log lines:
       > building
       > build flags: -j24
       > [1/2] Compiling C++ object src/nix-eval-jobs.p/nix-eval-jobs.cc.o
       > FAILED: src/nix-eval-jobs.p/nix-eval-jobs.cc.o
       > g++ -Isrc/nix-eval-jobs.p -Isrc -I../src -I/nix/store/i1p453r2yn6ilp1c0w5g8zi676jw830i-nix-2.13.1-dev/include/nix -I/nix/store/10s6235hmijgb9927z5dm9v11aqnyjyv-boehm-gc-8.2.2-dev/include -I/nix/store/yyq2xy779h3i450wimpqp36hb2wz6wwi-boost-1.79.0-dev/include -I/nix/store/ykm2v353pwr9yyj4vpgqxbncn3r6d56a-nlohmann_json-3.11.2/include -fdiagnostics-color=always -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Wall -Winvalid-pch -Wnon-virtual-dtor -pthread -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB -std=c++17 -std=c++17 -std=c++17 -std=c++17 -std=c++17 -fvisibility=hidden -MD -MQ src/nix-eval-jobs.p/nix-eval-jobs.cc.o -MF src/nix-eval-jobs.p/nix-eval-jobs.cc.o.d -o src/nix-eval-jobs.p/nix-eval-jobs.cc.o -c ../src/nix-eval-jobs.cc
       > ../src/nix-eval-jobs.cc: In function 'nix::Value* flakeTopLevelValue(nix::EvalState&, nix::Bindings&)':
       > ../src/nix-eval-jobs.cc:148:34: error: 'nix::flake::LockFlags' has no non-static data member named 'allowMutable'
       >   148 |                                  });
       >       |                                  ^
       > ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed.
       For full logs, run 'nix log /nix/store/k3yr2cb5dwvmaffylyrx4f87y8la6haf-nix-eval-jobs-2.9.0-colmena.drv'.
error: 1 dependencies of derivation '/nix/store/in940aaww767gf0g2dzjiv264ql489an-colmena-0.4.0-pre.drv' failed to build
error: 1 dependencies of derivation '/nix/store/vmqrxiawyv5gjb5xxc33qrk08z125mgc-nix-shell-env.drv' failed to build
14:50:31
@linus:schreibt.jetztLinux Hackerman Ask Yourself🍉: are you overriding colmena's inputs? 14:51:19
@askyourself:askyourself.caAsk Yourself🍉I don't think so, this is my current flake (with link to Colmena line): https://gitlab.com/IsaacBrown92/dotfiles/-/blob/main/flake.nix#L514:52:08
@linus:schreibt.jetztLinux Hackermanit's probably the nixpkgs follows.14:53:09
@linus:schreibt.jetztLinux HackermanTry without that14:53:14
@askyourself:askyourself.caAsk Yourself🍉That worked, thanks.14:55:00
@linus:schreibt.jetztLinux HackermanIt's always a tradeoff between using the same stuff that upstream is tested against, and having fewer copies of nixpkgs 😅14:55:47
@askyourself:askyourself.caAsk Yourself🍉Yeah, I thought it was good practice to standardize, but maybe I'm confused about that?14:56:24
@askyourself:askyourself.caAsk Yourself🍉Should I be standardizing like that by default until something breaks or is it just not even a good idea?14:56:40
@linus:schreibt.jetztLinux HackermanDepends on what you want14:56:40
@linus:schreibt.jetztLinux Hackerman if you want as little fuss as possible at the cost of disk space (and being more dependent on your upstreams for security updates), don't use any follows 14:57:09
@askyourself:askyourself.caAsk Yourself🍉Hmmm ok. 14:57:49
@askyourself:askyourself.caAsk Yourself🍉I think I need to get a better understanding of some of the inner workings of Nix.. 14:58:02
@askyourself:askyourself.caAsk Yourself🍉Thank you for the help!14:58:06
@dminuoso:matrix.orgdminuoso joined the room.17:13:12
@dminuoso:matrix.orgdminuoso

Hi. We're still on 22.05 and get warnings like trace: warning: The following Nixpkgs configuration keys set in meta.nixpkgs will be ignored: allowUnfree allowUnsupportedSystem contentAddressedByDefault enableParallelBuildingByDefault showDerivationWarnings strictDepsByDefault

Given that we set meta.nixpkgs = import sources.nixpkgs; (i.e. non-initialised nixpkgs from niv), Im a bit unsure how to squelch those warnings.

Does anyone have an idea?

17:15:44
@zhaofeng:zhaofeng.liZhaofeng Li
In reply to @dminuoso:matrix.org

Hi. We're still on 22.05 and get warnings like trace: warning: The following Nixpkgs configuration keys set in meta.nixpkgs will be ignored: allowUnfree allowUnsupportedSystem contentAddressedByDefault enableParallelBuildingByDefault showDerivationWarnings strictDepsByDefault

Given that we set meta.nixpkgs = import sources.nixpkgs; (i.e. non-initialised nixpkgs from niv), Im a bit unsure how to squelch those warnings.

Does anyone have an idea?

If you aren't setting any of the configs, this warning should be harmless. The warning will disappear once you upgrade to 22.11 where most nixpkgs config keys became typed so merging would work as expected.
18:23:46
@dminuoso:matrix.orgdminuosoWell I am setting in nixpkgs.config inside the host config. Im just curious whether I can even make the warning disappear.18:44:03
@zhaofeng:zhaofeng.liZhaofeng Li I think you can explicitly set all of them in meta.nodeNixpkgs but it's quite tedious. The warning is defined here: https://github.com/zhaofengli/colmena/blob/64c46fa0169233d4faed70c52583cd3183c7f5aa/src/nix/hive/eval.nix#L132-L141 20:18:56
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa dminuoso: can I ask what's holding you back? Interested from a security team perspective. 20:36:01
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaI assume this is work related?20:36:12
@dminuoso:matrix.orgdminuoso hexa: Oh yeah. Updating closures for 22.11 is scheduled right after we're done with a critical project, so probably next week or so. 20:54:16
@dminuoso:matrix.orgdminuoso It was a bit of a mismanagement on my side, at the time it was released we had a lot of folks on vacation. Next time we should probably prepare closures for a new nixos release before the release, but oh well. 20:55:44
@dminuoso:matrix.orgdminuosoIt's a bit of an effort because we have a lot of nixos machines involved, so we have to do audits, backport changes, etc..20:56:28
@dminuoso:matrix.orgdminuoso * It's a bit of an effort because we have a lot of nixos machines involved, so we have to do audits, rebase changes, etc..20:56:39

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6