!UNVBThoJtlIiVwiDjU:nixos.org

Staging

318 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
12 Oct 2025
@k900:0upti.meK900It didn't get through the queue16:54:56
@k900:0upti.meK900We don't really want the 20k rebuilds at this point16:55:21
@yuka:yuka.devYureka (she/her)yep16:55:22
@ihar.hrachyshka:matrix.orgIhar Hrachyshkahow does one estimate when the next staging-next -> master will happen? (e.g. to determine if a temporary fix in master for a build failure is due while we wait for next->master to happen)16:59:54
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughan joined the room.17:00:39
@k900:0upti.meK900Usually just ask here17:01:04
@k900:0upti.meK900I'd say we're looking at middle of next week17:01:22
@k900:0upti.meK900At the earliest17:01:25
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanDidn't know this room existed, I do now, sorry17:01:25
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughan Yureka (she/her): Can't we merge that patch now that it is conditional on musl? 17:04:24
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanSorry I didn't spot that, I thought all the patches were conditional on musl even 17:04:34
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanLike you say it's more proper to apply the patch unconditionally, but I thought we always make it conditional17:05:54
@yuka:yuka.devYureka (she/her)that was the idea17:08:12
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilyhttps://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/451386 but depends on https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/45138517:08:18
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanI know what happened anyway, I had https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/451274 open and mistook the tags when I moved to the other tab 17:08:25
@yuka:yuka.devYureka (she/her) we usually don't want patches to be conditional on something because the people doing the updates won't notice when patches no longer apply 17:08:36
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanI see yeah, just like the systemd example17:08:49
@emilazy:matrix.orgemily(and because a patch conditional inherently can't be upstreamed)17:08:52
@emilazy:matrix.orgemily(so a conditional "inside" the patch is always nicer)17:09:05
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanAre the rebuild labels based on inherent rebuild cost? Or is it based on whatever hydra/ci has to build?17:09:25
@yuka:yuka.devYureka (she/her)I don't understand the question17:09:38
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanLike I wouldn't have expected the systemd rebuild count to be so low17:09:42
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilyI wonder if the "backport" flow is nicer for rebuild-avoidance too.17:09:43
@emilazy:matrix.orgemily do the nice thing on staging, add the bodges to make it not a mass rebuild when backporting to -next. 17:09:50
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanah okay it's because it's conditional on musl it avoids the rebuild labels 17:10:04
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilythat way the most you can neglect to do is getting the fix early, rather than neglecting to clean up.17:10:12
@yuka:yuka.devYureka (she/her)that's because hydra doesn't build pkgsMusl.systemd17:10:12
@yuka:yuka.devYureka (she/her)or anything depending on it17:10:16
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanWhat's needed to make hydra keep track of this? :P17:10:25
@matthewcroughan:defenestrate.itmatthewcroughanI wanted to make a flake to keep track of it, I'm in the process of doing that atm17:10:34

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6