| 24 Oct 2025 |
|  neobrain left the room. | 10:30:47 |
 emily | FWIW pkgsCross.aarch64-multiplatform.bintoolsNoLibc does not evaluate on x86_64-linux right now. it works on 25.05. | 20:54:51 |
| emily | broken by 5c1955ff1404eddf3c0379a0573aabe83ac5bca3 | 20:59:35 |
| 25 Oct 2025 |
| emily | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/197674/files this PR confuses me deeply | 01:04:30 |
| emily | we don't support Canadian cross, right? we never have all of build, host, and target distinct? | 01:04:43 |
| emily | but this NOP apparently fixed things at some point? | 01:05:13 |
| emily | I must be too tired to think properly :) | 01:05:29 |
| emily | ok, no, it's not a nop, the derivations before and after differ, I'm just confused | 01:10:07 |
| emily | oh | 01:11:38 |
| emily | libraries = lib.makeExtensible (libraries: let
callPackage = newScope (libraries // buildLlvmTools // { inherit stdenv cmake libxml2 python3 isl release_version version monorepoSrc; });
in {
| 01:11:45 |
| emily | yeah that. would explain it. | 01:11:47 |
 matthewcroughan | What is Canadian cross, and where can I learn more about the origins of this terM/ | 14:22:39 |
| matthewcroughan | * What is Canadian cross, and where can I learn more about the origins of this term? | 14:22:40 |
 Puna | different platforms for build, host & target. i.e. cross-compiling (x86_64-linux -> aarch64-linux) a cross-compiler (aarch64-linux -> riscv64-none) | 14:26:43 |
 dramforever | https://crosstool-ng.github.io/docs/toolchain-types/
The term Canadian Cross was coined because at the time that these issues were all being hashed out, Canada had three national political parties (per Wikipedia).
| 14:27:28 |
| emily | it's the stupidest term in the universe | 14:38:31 |
 alexfmpe | what's this "ng" I keep seeing everywhere? | 14:39:34 |
