| 20 Aug 2024 |
 Mic92 | I have a workaround | 14:47:11 |
 John Ericson | Mic92: "in Nixpkgs"? | 15:01:33 |
| John Ericson | what header is missing? | 15:01:37 |
| Mic92 | Yes | 15:01:42 |
| John Ericson | sounds like something that tomberek fixed recently | 15:01:43 |
| Mic92 | here is the fix: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/335342/commits/e046ff4a2b9272f6f9a886dca3c29c5e3a4a4532 | 15:01:54 |
| John Ericson | ah OK | 15:04:09 |
| John Ericson | yeah that's fair | 15:04:16 |
| John Ericson | thanks Mic92 | 15:04:18 |
| 21 Aug 2024 |
| Mic92 | John Ericson: tomberek Eelco I added you as code owner for nixpkgs: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/336270 | 06:16:24 |
|  @shymega:one.ems.host joined the room. | 16:36:55 |
| 22 Aug 2024 |
|  @iensu:matrix.org left the room. | 06:40:51 |
|  shogo changed their profile picture. | 07:15:32 |
|  Artur Manuel joined the room. | 12:57:31 |
|  @matrix:03j.de joined the room. | 14:21:35 |
| Artur Manuel changed their profile picture. | 14:53:04 |
|  nyanbinary 🏳️⚧️ left the room. | 17:20:30 |
| 23 Aug 2024 |
|  @nuc1eon:matrix.org left the room. | 00:50:33 |
| Mic92 | Robert Hensing (roberth): Do you have access to macOS or do you need something like a flamegraph for nix 2.18 vs 2.24? | 09:41:23 |
 connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Can someone remind me — the Nix option to print the number of function calls is only for nix-language functions? Or would I be able to see the number of times functions like https://github.com/NixOS/nix/blob/0bcc83d0e749dacaba3acc74f54bcd693fdb6068/src/libexpr/attr-set.hh#L114 were invoked?
If not, what’s the best practice for profiling a specific function in the Nix implementation? | 16:40:47 |
 Robert Hensing (roberth) | In reply to @joerg:thalheim.io
Robert Hensing (roberth): Do you have access to macOS or do you need something like a flamegraph for nix 2.18 vs 2.24? not a true x86_64 one | 17:28:10 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | I'm fairly confident that 2.18 is faster because we added a cache we're not taking much (or any?) advantage of yet. The reason is we're moving to a setup that will be faster than 2.18 but that's taking longer than expected to get there. I think we should look into disabling that for now, but I haven't found the time to confirm this yet, so caveat. | 17:34:13 |
| Mic92 | @roberthensing:matrix.org: i could try to get you ssh access to one in 1-2 weeks. What also works very well is this: https://github.com/Mic92/dotfiles/blob/main/.github/workflows/os-ondemand.yaml | 18:12:06 |
| Mic92 | It's also a nice devenv for windows | 18:12:28 |
| Mic92 | GitHub still does x86 for Mac. So that's probably the easiest option | 18:13:11 |
| Mic92 | If you can point me to the cache I.e the commit, I can check if disabling it performs better | 18:14:53 |
 emily | I think that GitHub Actions thing is against the Actions terms of service FWIW (your judgement call to make: just making it known) | 18:21:43 |
 jade_ | i would personally recommend a certain "osx-kvm" which is at least only a license violation of macOS purely on your own computer | 18:23:31 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | In reply to @joerg:thalheim.io
If you can point me to the cache I.e the commit, I can check if disabling it performs better Not sure if useful but it'd be
- originally https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/9485
- however, performance was improved in a later PR
- and as you know may be improved again by https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/11330
So I don't know how representative the delta of that PR would be anymore
| 18:24:22 |
| emily | well, also probably a more serious copyright violation to obtain the things you need to use it unless you already own a Mac… | 18:24:50 |
