DevOS | 32 Members | |
| Seeking help and geeking out together on https://github.com/divnix/devos & https://github.com/divnix/digga | 10 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 9 Dec 2021 | ||
| https://github.com/divnix/devos/blob/main/flake.nix has a bit that refers to what is that core and where is it defined? | 02:19:40 | |
| Answering: https://github.com/divnix/devos/blob/287cb82d1ccd74693ae844869baa34228f143c21/profiles/core/default.nix | 02:21:01 | |
| I try to enter
my user is defined in | 06:21:51 | |
Have you staged users/cw/default.nix in git? | 06:45:36 | |
| no! | 07:22:42 | |
| staging didn't help | 07:25:58 | |
| Oddly though, the cw user change wasn't staged | 07:26:24 | |
| * Oddly though, the cw user change wasn't staged either | 07:26:41 | |
In reply to @cw:kernelpanic.cafeNot intended to be bitchy, lol | 08:20:42 | |
In reply to @kraftnix:matrix.org At work I learned that the follows inputs are not completely gone and that the only really effective way is to reduce & push to the leave:
| 14:27:48 | |
| I also may add, that even if it is a "horrible beast" indeed, it's also more transparent and locally reasonable. The latter is a huge win in complexity reduction. | 14:29:18 | |
| * I also may add, that even if it is a "horrible beast" indeed, it's also more transparent and locally reasonable. The latter is a huge win in complexity containment. | 14:29:46 | |
| At this point, my current best advice to reduce closure size is to fare with a balanced approch: deduplicate the core blobs like nixpkgs and make sure you don't have largely duplicated dep trees, but don't care too much about leaf packages with only a few runtime deps & don't care at all about pure nix libraries. | 14:37:25 | |
Especially for the latter, the pain of hidden side effects due to incompatibilities between version is also a lot bigger than the gain in closure size reduction or cleanup of the lock file: for example, at one point flake-utils introduced aarch64-darwin and some packages wheren't ready & that broke downstream CIs. | 14:39:25 | |
| * Especially for the latter, the pain of hidden side effects due to incompatibilities between version is also a lot bigger than the gain in closure size reduction or cleanup of the lock file: for example, at one point flake-utils introduced `aarch64-darwin` as a default system and some packages wheren't ready & that broke downstream CIs. | 14:40:04 | |
| * Especially for the latter, the pain of hidden side effects due to incompatibilities between version is also a lot bigger than the gain in closure size reduction or cleanup of the lock file: for example, at one point flake-utils introduced `aarch64-darwin` as a default system and some packages wheren't ready & that broke downstream CIs, because flake checks started failing. | 14:40:35 | |
| * Especially for the latter, the pain of hidden side effects due to incompatibilities between version is also a lot bigger than the gain in closure size reduction or cleanup of the lock file: for example, at one point flake-utils introduced `aarch64-darwin` as a default system and some packages wheren't ready & that broke downstream CIs, because flake checks started failing, iirc. | 14:40:43 | |
| * At work I learned that the issues with follows inputs are not completely gone and that the only _really_ effective way is to reduce & push to the leave: - reduce -> don't bother about non-nixpkgs, since they are usually libs, are small and don't have huge deps themselves - push to the leaf: make it a responsability of the end user flake. (Almost) all follows issues that I still hace seen with recent versions could be resolve when the follows statements are used at the leaf. | 14:41:02 | |
| * At work I learned that the issues with follows inputs are not completely gone and that the only _really_ effective way is to reduce & push to the leave: - reduce -> don't bother about non-nixpkgs, since they are usually libs, are small and don't have huge deps themselves - push to the leaf -> make it a responsability of the end user flake. (Almost) all follows issues that I still hace seen with recent versions could be resolve when the follows statements are used at the leaf. | 14:41:12 | |
| * At work I learned that the issues with follows inputs are not completely gone and that the only _really_ effective way to deal with it (for now) is to reduce & push to the leave: - reduce -> don't bother about non-nixpkgs, since they are usually libs, are small and don't have huge deps themselves - push to the leaf -> make it a responsability of the end user flake. (Almost) all follows issues that I still hace seen with recent versions could be resolve when the follows statements are used at the leaf. | 14:42:05 | |
Btw, I kicked bud out of my own env, since I really like the uniformity that deploy-rs provides for the current use cases of bud. | 14:43:34 | |
| * Btw, I kicked `bud` out of my own env, since I really like the uniformity that `deploy-rs` provides for the current use cases of bud. | 14:43:48 | |
In reply to @blaggacao:matrix.orgugh, i was hoping nix#4641 would fix the follows issues :( | 15:30:03 | |
In reply to @blaggacao:matrix.orgyeah i think i've also come to the same opinion, I really did like compressing down the lockfile as it made it easier to read and track dependency updates, and reason about what sources + revisions I am using, at the potential cost of incompatibility by forcing a lib to be a different revision. But it probably is better to only force nixpkgs and allow multiple lib revisions even if it makes the lockfile very large and harder to read, just for my own sanity's sake | 15:32:18 | |
In reply to @blaggacao:matrix.orginteresting, I mostly use bud purely for the shorthand of bud repl, otherwise I use nix + deploy, given that bud also started pulling down poetry2nix via beatysh and I had wrangle the follows back into place, I have been considering dropping it | 15:34:58 | |
Yeah, the repl is a good workflow aide, but since newer nix has :lf . part of it is also superfluous. I kind of fell that a zoxide-based workfloe that quickly drops you into the flake repo on any machine is just as handy & also leaves you in the fs-context that you'll be operating on. | 15:45:51 | |
| * Yeah, the repl is a good workflow aide, but since newer nix has `:lf .` part of it is also superfluous. I kind of feel that a `zoxide`-based workfloe that quickly drops you into the flake repo on any machine is just as handy & also leaves you in the fs-context that you'll be operating on. | 15:46:07 | |
| * Yeah, the repl is a good workflow aide, but since newer nix has `:lf .` part of it is also superfluous. I kind of feel that a `zoxide`-based workflow that quickly drops you into the flake repo on any machine is just as handy & also leaves you in the fs-context that you'll be operating on. | 15:46:15 | |
| I wanted to brush of some barbed edges of the deploy-rs / home-manager workflow. | 15:47:17 | |
Although it works with a small patch on my end, we really need to make nix profile respect meta.priority. since co-existence of nix & nix-zsh-completions depend on it. | 15:48:25 | |