!UNVBThoJtlIiVwiDjU:nixos.org

Staging

317 Members
Staging merges | Find currently open staging-next PRs: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pulls?q=is%3Apr+sort%3Aupdated-desc+head%3Astaging-next+head%3Astaging-next-21.05+is%3Aopen109 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
21 Oct 2025
@grimmauld:grapevine.grimmauld.deGrimmauld (any/all)webkitgtk was marked insecure too due to libsoup210:27:23
@grimmauld:grapevine.grimmauld.deGrimmauld (any/all)* webkitgtk_4_0 was marked insecure too due to libsoup210:27:33
@k900:0upti.meK900Honestly if you want to yeet it be my guest10:27:51
@k900:0upti.meK900I'm not sure we want to yeet qtwebengine5 yet but qtwebkit can go10:28:05
@k900:0upti.meK900 Actually never mind it doesn't even rebuild those 10:46:17
@k900:0upti.meK900I'll just merge and let CUDA people scream at me later if they want10:46:25
@hexa:lossy.networkhexawas removed in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/45006511:43:29
@grimmauld:grapevine.grimmauld.deGrimmauld (any/all)i know, i approved that PR and would have merged that same day if jan didn't self-merge faster11:44:06
@grimmauld:grapevine.grimmauld.deGrimmauld (any/all)* i know, i approved that PR and would have merged that same day if jan hadn't self-merged11:44:19
@grimmauld:grapevine.grimmauld.deGrimmauld (any/all)my point was, both was marked insecure, qtwebkit even for longer, so we should also remove both11:45:16
@grimmauld:grapevine.grimmauld.deGrimmauld (any/all)with the webkitgtk_4_0 the argument was backports of newer webkitgtk ABI during the 25.11 release cycle, but for qtwebkit there isn't any updates at all anymore. So it needs to go.11:46:07
@grimmauld:grapevine.grimmauld.deGrimmauld (any/all)If only we had a good deprecation/removal process...11:46:53
@k900:0upti.meK900For real though if anyone wants to yeet qtwebkit be my guest11:56:40
@k900:0upti.meK900The only reason I haven't done it yet is spoons11:56:46
@dramforever:matrix.orgdramforeverworkaround idea for the systemd static nodes thing, might be too cursed: just modprobe all the static nodes on boot12:22:21
@dramforever:matrix.orgdramforeverwait this is technically not a staging matter anymore12:22:40
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilyare there any channel blockers that need someone looking at them right now?23:58:08
22 Oct 2025
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilyI see https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/454260 on the status page but not clear to me what it's waiting on00:16:37
@prince213:matrix.orgprince213https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/45442202:32:56
@prince213:matrix.orgprince213Need some review on this CVE fix02:33:01
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátThis is unresolved so far, too https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/453603#issuecomment-342623343805:20:30
@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgElvishJerriccooh crap, I didn't see that comment05:23:09
@dramforever:matrix.orgdramforeveroh, yeah that's why i was asking again about whether we want to work around this...05:23:51
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátAnd this one is a channel blocker: https://hydra.nixos.org/build/309828960#tabs-buildsteps05:26:19
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát Also nixpkgs-unstable is blocked by an unrelated merge that happened before merging staging-next
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/452844#issuecomment-3425510646
05:28:27
@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgElvishJerricco I can't really think of a good way to workaround this. Just loading all modules in kmod static-nodes is really excessive, since we only need to fix the nodes that would get uaccess. And patching systemd.package seems...... not great 05:32:56
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátSo do that filename replacement in those roughly 10 .nix files?05:35:58
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát* So we do that filename replacement in those roughly 10 .nix files?05:36:02
@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgElvishJerriccoright05:36:03
@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgElvishJerriccothat's the thing that fixes the tests but not the bug05:36:14

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6