| 6 Feb 2026 |
 Gaétan Lepage | Sure SomeoneSerge (back on matrix), feel free to double check. | 22:35:32 |
| Gaétan Lepage | Indeed, I don't think so. | 22:35:43 |
| 8 Feb 2026 |
 hexa (UTC+1) | where can I find libnvidia-ml.so.1? | 03:09:43 |
| hexa (UTC+1) | * where can I find libnvidia-ml.so.1 used by py3nvml? | 03:09:50 |
| hexa (UTC+1) | nvm … /nix/store/9g9zb0r0hk63fm1xq8582bgjd8d69k0k-nvidia-x11-580.119.02-6.12.68/lib/libnvidia-ml.so.1
| 03:10:49 |
 Robbie Buxton | In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
where can I find libnvidia-ml.so.1? This is a nvidia kernel library so if you aren’t on nixos you need to get it from where you install it on the host | 03:37:00 |
| Robbie Buxton | But looks like you found it! | 03:37:12 |
| hexa (UTC+1) | it is below the driverLink path | 03:38:20 |
| Robbie Buxton | Yeah on nixos iirc it’s symlinked into /run/opengl-driver/lib if I’m not mistaken | 03:39:39 |
| hexa (UTC+1) | correct | 03:40:14 |
| hexa (UTC+1) | addDriverRunpath.driverLink is the relevant attribute | 03:40:24 |
|  kaya 𖤐 changed their profile picture. | 22:50:15 |
| Gaétan Lepage | After some testing, our current torch version (2.9.0) does build against cuda 13.0, but not cuda 13.1:
/nix/store/42f8i6v4gfkvdimy9aczwqik3scl6dpw-cuda13.1-cuda_cccl-13.1.115/include/cub/device/dispatch/dispatch_radix_sort.cuh(1425): error: no operator "+=" matches these operands
operand types are: at::native::<unnamed>::offset_t += const int64_t
end_offsets_current_it += num_current_segments;
Context: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/486717 | 23:01:20 |
| Gaétan Lepage | I'll try to ship torch 2.10.0 ASAP, hoping that it is compatible with cuda 13.1 (which should unfortunately * | 23:02:38 |
| Gaétan Lepage | * I'll try to ship torch 2.10.0 ASAP, hoping that it is compatible with cuda 13.1 (which should unfortunately not be the case). | 23:02:57 |
|  @niten:fudo.im left the room. | 23:07:13 |
| 4 Aug 2022 |
|  Winter (she/her) joined the room. | 03:26:42 |
| Winter (she/her) | (hi, just came here to read + respond to this.) | 03:28:52 |
 tpw_rules | hey. i had previously sympathzied with samuela and like i said before had some of the same frustrations. i just edited my github comment to add "[CUDA] packages are universally complicated, fragile to package, and critical to daily operations. Nix being able to manage them is unbelievably helpful to those of us who work with them regularly, even if support is downgraded to only having an expectation of function on stable branches." | 03:29:14 |
| Winter (she/her) | In reply to @tpw_rules:matrix.org
i'm mildly peeved about a recent merging of something i maintain where i'm pretty sure the merger does not own the expensive hardware required to properly test the package. i don't think it broke anything but i was given precisely 45 minutes to see the notification before somebody merged it ugh, 45 minutes? that's... not great. not to air dirty laundry but did you do what samuela did in the wandb PR and at least say that that wasn't a great thing to do? (not sure how else to word that, you get what i mean) | 03:30:23 |
| tpw_rules | no, i haven't yet, but i probably will | 03:31:03 |
| Winter (she/her) | i admittedly did that with a PR once, i forget how long the maintainer was requested for but i merged it because multiple people reported it fixed the issue. the maintainer said "hey, don't do that" after and now i do think twice before merging. so it could help, is what i'm saying. | 03:31:50 |
| tpw_rules | i'm not sure what went wrong with the wandb PR anyway, i think it was just a boneheaded move on the maintainer's part | 03:32:10 |
| Winter (she/her) | (it was also simple enough that it was fine and the maintainer said it looked good after) | 03:32:15 |
| tpw_rules | * i'm not sure what went wrong with the wandb PR anyway, i think it was just a boneheaded move on the merger's part | 03:32:19 |
| tpw_rules | but i thought most of the frustration was around packages which don't really involve CUDA breaking the fragile CUDA packages, and i'm not sure how the warning helps in this case. it's not like nixpkgs-review prints out the comments. maybe i'm wrong. but it is a legitimate problem | 03:34:19 |
| Winter (she/her) | the frustration that i see is that people are touching packages that he maintains, am i missing further context here? | 03:35:09 |
| tpw_rules | did you ever see this? https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixpkgss-current-development-workflow-is-not-sustainable/18741 | 03:35:43 |
| Winter (she/her) | oh yes i did | 03:35:49 |
| Winter (she/her) | but that's not what the topic of this PR/the notice is, though? | 03:36:11 |
