| 21 Oct 2023 |
 fricklerhandwerk | If you need some guidance to make the change, check this new page: https://nixos.org/manual/nix/unstable/contributing/documentation
It likely won’t cover everything you need, and I’d be happy about feedback on how to improve it | 09:53:30 |
 alejandrosame | Is the team aware of this PR: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/108063? | 14:10:41 |
 proofconstruction | Have been very busy but will be able to review some stuff this weekend | 14:32:26 |
| fricklerhandwerk | In reply to @alejandrosame:matrix.org
Is the team aware of this PR: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/108063? Aware but have no opinion about it. | 16:20:40 |
| 22 Oct 2023 |
 henrik-ch | In reply to @alejandrosame:matrix.org
Is the team aware of this PR: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/108063? I am aware of it - was looking at it at nixcon with ryantm . | 11:29:45 |
 asymmetric | is there a reason why for the module system, we say "defining an option" instead of "setting an option"? I feel like i have to think a couple seconds every time i read definition/declaration, to remember what each means. this wouldn't happen with setting/declaration | 15:21:40 |
|  Stefan Schroeder joined the room. | 19:44:10 |
| 23 Oct 2023 |
| fricklerhandwerk | In reply to @asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk
is there a reason why for the module system, we say "defining an option" instead of "setting an option"? I feel like i have to think a couple seconds every time i read definition/declaration, to remember what each means. this wouldn't happen with setting/declaration Robert Hensing (roberth) wrote a proposal on changing that: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/185234
I think it should be implemented as written. There's a pile of issues on module system docs, this is one of it.
| 09:41:45 |
| fricklerhandwerk | In reply to @asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk
is there a reason why for the module system, we say "defining an option" instead of "setting an option"? I feel like i have to think a couple seconds every time i read definition/declaration, to remember what each means. this wouldn't happen with setting/declaration * Robert Hensing (roberth) wrote a proposal on changing that: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/185234
I think it should be implemented as written. There's a pile of issues with the module system docs, this is one of it.
| 09:42:05 |
| fricklerhandwerk | * Robert Hensing (roberth) wrote a proposal on changing that: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/185234
I think it should be implemented as written.
| 09:42:24 |
| fricklerhandwerk | I’ll only be in the meeting for the first half hour today because of a conflicting appointment | 11:16:47 |
| asymmetric | In reply to @fricklerhandwerk:matrix.org
I’ll only be in the meeting for the first half hour today because of a conflicting appointment thanks! i'ld love to discuss some of this stuff on thu (i can't attend today) | 12:55:00 |
| asymmetric | oops, was meant as a reply to the post above 😉 | 12:55:11 |
| 25 Oct 2023 |
|  @federicodschonborn:matrix.org changed their profile picture. | 00:13:04 |
 fsbof | I've been upgrading NixOS. On the good side, I've had options that other distros didn't offer but I still broke stuff! Badly! I finally tracked down that "virtualisation.libvirtd.qemu.ovmf.package = pkgs.OVMFFull" updated the version of OVMF_CODE.fd which subsequently caused virtual domains using UEFI to no longer successfully boot. This is likely related to a change in size of the nvram, and starting the domains with the virsh --reset-nvram option allowed them to boot. I also needed to then go into the UEFI config and update the display resolution in order to see the actual boot process. This took hours to work through - is it worth documenting anywhere for others because I couldn't find much. Also I am still on NixOS 22.05 - Trying to get to 23.05, so my issues maybe 'out-of-date' but they got me! | 10:00:05 |
 infinisil | fsbof: Sounds like that should be added (if it's not already) to the 23.05 release notes. There's a breaking changes section | 10:02:31 |
| fsbof | I did look in the release notes and could only find two mentions of OVMF changes in 22.11 and 21.11 | 10:06:09 |
| fsbof | I also managed to break it with out needing to upgrade the NixOS version - just by add the line above to configuration.nix in 22.05 when it previously didn't exist. | 10:08:34 |
| fsbof | I guess what I am saying is it could happen in two situations | 10:08:56 |
| infinisil | Making a PR to the release notes for both cases would be good imo | 10:09:42 |
| infinisil | For the the first release where each became a problem | 10:10:07 |
| fsbof | Can you guide me through the process - happy to do it, just haven't done it before | 10:10:13 |
 raitobezarius | Please include details about how did you narrow down to this, it's complicated when release notes misidentify the root cause | 10:10:32 |
| raitobezarius | We have similar OVMF bumps for 23.11 and they will be breaking a lot of shit without any recourse I think because EDK2 maintainers seems to have broken a lot of stuff with OpenSSL 3 bumps | 10:11:21 |
| fsbof | raitobezarius: Yes - I am concerned that 'getting it working' isn't really the same as finding a problem! My configuration could have been broken to start with! It has been a steep learning curve but very worth it. | 10:12:30 |
| infinisil | fsbof: On my phone right now, but release note sources are here: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/tree/master/nixos/doc/manual/release-notes
Github allows you to edit files right online and then make a PR for that: https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/working-with-files/managing-files/editing-files#editing-files-in-another-users-repository | 10:12:47 |
| raitobezarius | I'd recommend NixOS Wiki personally for "unbreaking recipes" than release notes | 10:12:57 |
| raitobezarius | Especially when touching older ones | 10:13:02 |
| raitobezarius | We usually archive older release notes after a while | 10:13:09 |
| fsbof | suggestion - how about I write something up - put it in the Wiki and let you two see what you reckon? | 10:13:52 |
