| 19 May 2025 |
 emily | which we use a fair bit | 13:48:02 |
 K900 | Yes but it doesn't exist on Canadian cross | 13:48:26 |
| emily | I mean, it can, right? you just have to build another compiler | 13:49:48 |
| K900 | Well yes but that kinda defeats the point of Canadian cross | 13:51:02 |
| emily | is there a point of Canadian cross? | 13:52:30 |
| K900 | Yes, the point of Canadian cross is that you use your slow build machine to build a cross-compiler for a fast host machine | 13:53:19 |
| K900 | And then use that cross-compiler to build packages for target | 13:53:27 |
| K900 | But faster | 13:53:31 |
| emily | you could just build the compiler on the fast host machine. | 13:55:33 |
| emily | to me the sensible use-case for Canadian cross looks like "we can only get x86 CI, not AArch64, but we want to offer AArch64 binaries of our compiler for various targets" | 13:56:23 |
| emily | in which case building an extra compiler is basically fine. | 13:56:32 |
| 21 May 2025 |
|  WeetHet changed their profile picture. | 10:59:09 |
| 22 May 2025 |
 rhelmot | perl modules cross is an irredeemable nightmare | 22:29:14 |
| rhelmot | I cannot figure out how to get it to build extension modules that do not link the build platform's libc... | 22:30:16 |
| rhelmot | new problem - https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/development/tools/misc/gdb/default.nix#L40 I don't think this is correct, since when I build gdb with buildPlatform = linux and hostPlatform = freebsd, this ends up being a linux path pulling glibc into the closure, which is completely useless. | 22:56:58 |
| rhelmot | does anyone know how to test whatever that line is supposed to support? | 22:57:41 |
| rhelmot | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/73574 concerning... | 23:03:10 |
