| 29 May 2023 |
 Robert Hensing (roberth) | it's not a complete representation of nixos entrypoints yet though | 13:38:50 |
 @piegames:matrix.org | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
All good to me, I haven't pushed anything to the RFC I wouldn't be okay with, would like to hear from Robert Hensing (roberth) as well though. I think niksnut's arguments have been properly addressed here, but it might be proper to add the new arguments to the RFC as well. Hi Robert Hensing (roberth), we've had quite a bit of backlog, but please have a look at | 13:39:20 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | I've followed along, and I don't feel strongly about the points raised | 13:40:03 |
 nbp | well … in principle I would agree, but as long as we do not have a clean way to selectively "update" without replacing all attributes in an attribute set, this would increase the complexity for overlays which are trying to both library and packages. | 13:40:17 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | Or I guess you're asking me to add to the alternatives text? | 13:40:32 |
| nbp | slectively update … like suggested in S.O.S. | 13:40:35 |
| @piegames:matrix.org | In reply to @roberthensing:matrix.org
I've followed along, and I don't feel strongly about the points raised So, go for FCP? | 13:40:55 |
| nbp | * well … in principle I would agree (cleanly separating the top-level of nixpkgs), but as long as we do not have a clean way to selectively "update" without replacing all attributes in an attribute set, this would increase the complexity for overlays which are trying to both library and packages. | 13:41:07 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | In reply to @roberthensing:matrix.org
Or I guess you're asking me to add to the alternatives text? infinisil has been taking care of that, so I'd have to sync up with him first; not sure if that's productive | 13:41:25 |
 infinisil | No the question is just whether you accept the state of the current RFC | 13:41:47 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | Oh, right hadn't read up on the messages before that. I'll have a final look | 13:42:28 |
| infinisil | If so, approving on GitHub would be great, and then we'd have everything for FCP | 13:43:09 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | The unit base directory must only contain subdirectories of the form pkgs/unit/${shard}/${name}, | 13:44:12 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | technically you're duplicating pkgs/unit, as in pkgs/unit/pkgs/unit, but everyone understand what you mean | 13:44:30 |
| infinisil | Hehe good catch | 13:45:07 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | nix-build -E is --expr? | 13:48:12 |
| infinisil | Yeah | 13:48:21 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | hm ok | 13:48:25 |
| infinisil | Why does the current nix-build man page not document this flag :/ | 13:48:58 |
| infinisil | Oh right, nix-instantiate is mentioned, and that documents it | 13:49:28 |
| infinisil | Well, barely, it only contains a mention of it.. | 13:49:52 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | Improving the arguments, settings infrastructure and docs is an ongoing project | 13:50:03 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | A slow project though. We could use some help | 13:50:51 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) |
This notably doesn't work when name is already a package attribute, because then the default is never used and instead overridden.
| 13:52:07 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | or when someone adds a package with that name later | 13:52:17 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | hour-letter -> four-letter | 13:55:43 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | This would virtually a unlimited number of packages -> This would list? contain? house? | 13:56:31 |
| infinisil | Oh yeah, probably allow | 13:56:59 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | Makes a potentially transition -> Makes a potential transition | 13:58:19 |
| @piegames:matrix.org | I'm impressed at how "good" my brain is at overlooking these mistakes, completing the holes without me ever noticing … | 13:58:34 |
