| 11 Apr 2024 |
 Randy Eckenrode | In reply to @wegank:matrix.org
Wait, with the 11.0 SDK on x86_64-darwin? Yes. overrideSDK can build with one SDK and set an earlier deployment target. Fixing that was one of the goals of the rewrite in staging. | 16:53:10 |
| Randy Eckenrode | Darwin already has two other packages in the bootstrap that require the 11.0 SDK to build: psutil and libuv. cctools and ld64 would be the first to require a newer version at runtime. | 16:54:07 |
 Vladimír Čunát | You don't plan dropping x86_64-darwin anytime soon, I guess? | 16:58:39 |
 jonringer | Just to reason about time left, breaking changes to staging need to land by May 1st, to allow for some stabilization iterations before cutting the release. If we are signing up for a blocker, it should be able to fit within that time period (or very close to that time period). | 17:00:56 |
| jonringer | I'll defer to Weijia and Randy Eckenrode on the judgement call :) | 17:02:35 |
 Weijia | In reply to @wegank:matrix.org
I think I'd ask for an x86_64-darwin jobset (and a public announcement) before approving a PR on this, even if it only contains a treewide substitution of "10.12" by "10.14" And I intend to postpone this change to early June, to give macOS 10.12 and 10.13 users a six-month grace period | 18:25:24 |
| Weijia | Announcing an immediate end of life for them is too difficult for me... | 18:25:47 |
 adamcstephens | Macs that were built in 2012 can upgrade to 10.14/10.15.... | 18:29:53 |
| adamcstephens | we've almost doubled Apple's support for these systems, and at what point are we encouraging bad security behavior by continuing to offer support for them? | 18:36:14 |
| Randy Eckenrode | In reply to @vcunat:matrix.org
You don't plan dropping x86_64-darwin anytime soon, I guess? No, both would still be supported. This is just about not being able to link packages on <10.14. | 18:37:59 |
| Vladimír Čunát | OK. I meant it only as a loosely related, and half-joking. | 18:39:00 |
| adamcstephens | so they could consume cached packages, but not build (link) them themselves? | 18:39:01 |
| Randy Eckenrode | In reply to @wegank:matrix.org
And I intend to postpone this change to early June, to give macOS 10.12 and 10.13 users a six-month grace period So targeting 24.11, essentially? (Though given that unstable is the default, it’s essentially effective immediately.) | 18:39:28 |
| Randy Eckenrode | In reply to @adam:robins.wtf
so they could consume cached packages, but not build (link) them themselves? Correct. The linker uses a ton of GCD stuff that’s only available in 10.14+. It may be possible to build libdispatch from source or user a portable replacement. I haven’t looked into those in detail yet. | 18:41:20 |
| Randy Eckenrode | In reply to @wegank:matrix.org
And I intend to postpone this change to early June, to give macOS 10.12 and 10.13 users a six-month grace period * So targeting 24.11, essentially? (Though given that unstable is the default, it would affect many immediately.) | 18:41:43 |
| Randy Eckenrode | If the decision is to push it to June after the release, I can post an announcement in the Darwin news thread on Discourse. Not sure where else it should be announced? | 18:42:29 |
| Weijia | In reply to @reckenrode:matrix.org
If the decision is to push it to June after the release, I can post an announcement in the Darwin news thread on Discourse. Not sure where else it should be announced? Also in the release announcement | 18:45:30 |
| Randy Eckenrode | That this is the last release for 10.12 and 10.13 users I assume. | 18:46:52 |
| Randy Eckenrode | I’ll post in the Darwin news thread now so unstable users aren’t taken completely by surprise. | 18:47:23 |
| Weijia | In reply to @reckenrode:matrix.org
That this is the last release for 10.12 and 10.13 users I assume. Yes, and that they should stay on nixpkgs-24.05-darwin instead of bumping to latest unstable | 18:48:02 |
| Weijia | In reply to @reckenrode:matrix.org
That this is the last release for 10.12 and 10.13 users I assume. * Yes, and that they should stay on nixpkgs-24.05-darwin instead of bumping to latest unstable before upgrading their systems | 18:48:25 |
| Weijia | * Yes, and that they should stay on nixpkgs-24.05-darwin instead of bumping to latest unstable before upgrading to macOS 10.14+ | 18:49:08 |
| adamcstephens | wouldn't the majority of users have already upgraded to 10.14+ if they could? | 18:49:58 |
| Randy Eckenrode | I asked in the infra channel. Wr have no information on what people are running. This is a conservative approach to avoid unwelcome surprises. | 18:55:49 |
| Randy Eckenrode | * I asked in the infra channel. Wr have no information on what people are running. This is a conservative approach to avoid unwelcome surprises for users still on old versions. | 18:56:09 |
| Randy Eckenrode | * I asked in the infra channel. We have no information on what people are running. This is a conservative approach to avoid unwelcome surprises for users still on old versions. | 18:56:18 |
| Randy Eckenrode | I plan to investigate alternatives to libdispatch, but it’s probably still a good idea to bump the SDK anyway. | 19:17:02 |
|  Anthony Rsl set a profile picture. | 21:59:19 |
| Anthony Rsl removed their profile picture. | 22:12:54 |
| 12 Apr 2024 |
| Randy Eckenrode | FWIW, I got cctools and ld64 building without having to use the 11.0 SDK. I think it would still be good to play for an SDK increase for 24.11, but it may only be to 10.13. | 01:57:00 |
