| 4 Apr 2025 |
 Mic92 | Also the question is, if those issues still persist. This was 2016. They have completely revamped their internal git implementation and make it distributed. | 13:15:03 |
| Mic92 | Because I don't see any performance degradation when fetching stuff this way. | 13:16:05 |
| Mic92 | If not, I have even more a reason to fetch my git repository from elsewhere. | 13:17:24 |
| Mic92 | Just checked that cocoapods has 20 times the files of nixpkgs | 13:20:07 |
 emily | feel like hydra distributing nixexprs is still what makes the most sense after all this time :) | 14:05:05 |
| Mic92 | Maybe for some stuff but for my dotfiles, where I am hacking on my nixpkgs fork, the shallow clone is many times faster if I do single commits for bug fixes. | 14:06:19 |
| Mic92 | It should be even cheaper for github to compute this delta over serving me the whole nixpkgs all over again. | 14:07:32 |
 tea | In reply to @qyliss:fairydust.space
https://blog.cocoapods.org/Master-Spec-Repo-Rate-Limiting-Post-Mortem/ If I understand it correctly, the problem here was that cocoa initially did a shallow clone but then upgraded that to a full clone, which is expensive
https://github.com/CocoaPods/CocoaPods/issues/4989#issuecomment-193772935
| 15:48:46 |
| 5 Apr 2025 |
|  Divya joined the room. | 08:13:38 |
| Divya | : Hello! I wanted to know how Nix packages GHC, does it bootstrap it entirely? How do you guys change the process when GHC changes build systems from 9.4 to 9.6 (from make to hadrian)? | 08:13:52 |
| Divya | I'm from Guix's Haskell team, trying to learn how you guys do it so that we can improve our Haskell situation :) | 08:14:37 |
 K900 | That's more of a #Nixpkgs / NixOS contributions question | 08:14:48 |
| K900 | Or maybe the Haskell room | 08:14:51 |
| K900 | (I think we have a Haskell room?) | 08:15:00 |
| K900 | Also @maralorn or @sterni probably know | 08:15:11 |
| Divya | In reply to @k900:0upti.me
That's more of a #Nixpkgs / NixOS contributions question Okay, apologies! | 08:16:14 |
| emily | it's bootstrapped from bindist, but yeah see #haskell:nixos.org | 08:16:23 |
| emily | I think full source bootstrap of GHC is still largely theoretical | 08:16:35 |
|  zexu joined the room. | 13:06:41 |
|  @tinybronca:sibnsk.net left the room. | 15:30:20 |
| 6 Apr 2025 |
 Las | I’m doing nix derivation show, then changing it a bit, then nix derivation add, but when I nix build my changed drv, it just outputs the drv as the output instead of building it? Bug somewhere? I assume the issue is my changes aren’t valid but I don’t get any errors and the documentation isn’t quite clear on it. | 11:14:26 |
| Las | I assume it’s my placeholder paths? | 11:14:48 |
| Las | Honestly it’s not clear to me why the output path is in the derivation at all | 11:18:56 |
| Las | Doing content addressed drvs only btw | 11:19:11 |
 flokli | You shouldn't be manually adding your own derivations, especially if you're not also calculating Output paths (correctly) | 11:24:22 |
| flokli | The only "official" way to do is by writing nix code, and having the evaluator emit it. For everything else, you're off the well-tested path. | 11:25:10 |
| flokli | It's unfortunate derivations are added as aterm into the store in first place. IMHO they should only be valid for the lifetime of the evaluation itself, and not be put in the store
| 11:26:05 |
|  sinan changed their profile picture. | 11:32:59 |
| emily | kind of at odds with the dynamic-derivations model, right? | 11:51:49 |
| emily | (not saying that I necessarily disagree, just that it seems like there's a commitment to some serialized derivation form at this point) | 11:52:21 |
