| 27 Mar 2025 |
 John Ericson | https://github.com/nixos/nix/commit/11d853462925d0b57fe956962e07edf5751fd4c3 | 20:07:55 |
| John Ericson | I think this commit was a mistake | 20:07:58 |
 Philip Taron (UTC-8) | 2.27.1 and 2.24.13 were both tagged in the NixOS/nix repository. Is there someone on deck to open a PR against nixpkgs? | 21:29:38 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | 
Download image.png | 21:34:12 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | I can do the 2.24.13 one, but the PR to introduce 2.26 was pretty beefy with 2_26 specific code. | 21:34:26 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | If that's the pattern, 2.27 is going to be equally beefy! | 21:35:21 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | cc Robert Hensing (roberth) as the author of the previous big-lift PR, https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/375856. | 21:44:01 |
 emily | if 2.27 is as different from 2.26 as it was from 2.25, something went horribly wrong | 21:48:10 |
| emily | they're the same Meson build system | 21:48:15 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Yes -- what I mean is that all that code was checked in under pkgs/tools/package-management/nix/vendor/2_26/ -- so this is the version that figures out how to share it | 21:48:51 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | (Since I assume that adding Nix 2.27 doesn't at the same time drop 2.26, which would be madness.) | 21:49:32 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | * Yes -- what I mean is that all that code was checked in under pkgs/tools/package-management/nix/vendor/2_26/ -- so this is the version that figures out how to share it or copy it/ | 21:49:42 |
| emily | I guess it should, since the Nix team only support the latest version and the version in Nixpkgs stable. | 21:52:48 |
| emily | btw, there is a much more sensible packaging in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/393509 but sadly I think it is not being pursued | 21:53:17 |
 SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) |
What on earth does "output" without method or hash or path or anything at all mean?
"name": > "bootstrap-stage0-binutils-wrapper-",
"outputs": {
"out": {}
},
CC Martin Schwaighofer
| 21:56:21 |
| emily | those are split outputs, no? | 22:12:07 |
| emily | the Nixpkgs outputs = … | 22:12:21 |
|  nishimara joined the room. | 22:21:49 |
| John Ericson | deferred input-addressed | 22:34:13 |
| John Ericson | i.e. it is an input-addressed that depends on content-addressed | 22:34:23 |
| John Ericson | we're waiting to building the content-addressed before we can input-address | 22:34:44 |
| John Ericson | this has the effect of doing an an end-run around hashDerivationModulo | 22:35:07 |
| John Ericson | the thing we will end up using for input-addressing is the resolved derivation, with no inputSrcs | 22:35:22 |
| John Ericson | * the thing we will end up using for input-addressing is the resolved derivation, with no inputDrvs only inputSrcs | 22:35:31 |
| 28 Mar 2025 |
 fzakaria | if I have an ATerm drv file; how can I add it to my store ? | 01:59:00 |
| fzakaria | (assuming "it's correct") | 01:59:05 |
| fzakaria | oh nix-store --add but the name has to end in .drv | 02:14:24 |
 Martin Schwaighofer | In reply to @Ericson2314:matrix.org
the thing we will end up using for input-addressing is the resolved derivation, with no inputDrvs only inputSrcs Ok, I understand, thanks | 13:14:30 |
| John Ericson | Mic92: btw if we could get diff3 enabled on mergify backports with committed conflicts, that would be great :) | 17:09:10 |
 Mic92 | John Ericson: can't see an option just now. Maybe we can use some github action again in the future for backports | 17:33:26 |
