| 29 Dec 2025 |
 Alexandros Liarokapis | One could probably directly reuse the discovery functionality of the nvidia container toolkit go library | 00:29:52 |
| Alexandros Liarokapis | * One could probably directly reuse the discovery functionality of the nvidia container toolkit go library (or flatboat or similar) | 00:49:05 |
| Alexandros Liarokapis | * One could probably directly reuse the discovery functionality of the nvidia container toolkit go library (or flatpak or similar) | 00:49:13 |
 Gaétan Lepage | Hi!
I finally found some time to work on the llama-cpp-python-libcuda.so-stubs-missing bug and fixed outlines by skipping its pythonImportsCheckHook and tests when cudaSupport was enabled.
This allowed me to finally unblock the vllm bump.
It builds fine with and without cudaSupport. Feel free to test/review: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/467418 | 17:36:41 |
 connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Good post about the exact problem we run into when trying to create dynamic libraries for Magma with our default set of CUDA capabilities: https://fzakaria.com/2025/12/28/huge-binaries | 18:06:21 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | I won't be in the weekly call tomorrow btw | 18:06:33 |
| 30 Dec 2025 |
 Collin Arnett | Hello, I'm working on getting a nixos module written for dcgm. connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) I know you have an old draft PR so I'm basing a lot of it on that. As part of that I've had to go ahead and update dcgm and it's prometheus exporter. I would appreciate it if I could get a review from anyone here if they have the chance :) https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/474721 . dcgm is kind of a cursed package so I did my best with the patching but if anyone has any critical feedback it would be more than welcome. | 14:49:19 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | I don’t personally use it and will have limited time so I don’t think I can review it, but I’m fine with anyone else reviewing and merging it | 18:08:38 |
| 31 Dec 2025 |
 lon | Wow super cool, thank you. Haven't run benchmarks but it looks a lot faster | 13:58:23 |
| Collin Arnett | Oh no worries. As far as the dcgm nix module I was mostly mentioning you above to make sure credit was given where credit is due :D | 16:21:47 |
| 1 Jan 2026 |
|  matthewcroughan changed their display name from matthewcroughan @ 39c3 (DECT 94667 or 97340 or 67192) to matthewcroughan. | 20:04:02 |
| 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 |
| Winter (she/her) | this wouldn't help that | 03:36:14 |
| Winter (she/her) | ~~is that what you're saying and i'm just lagging behind~~ | 03:36:27 |
| tpw_rules | no it wouldn't, but it reads to me like that's the underlying problem and this is a manifestation which can be controlled more easily. not to put thoughts in people's head | 03:37:07 |
| Winter (she/her) | right
(what do you mean by that last sentence, you don't want to influence anyone's opinion on the matter by saying that?) | 03:38:29 |
| tpw_rules | i guess? it's my personal opinion and thought and i'd appreciate comment from the man himself | 03:39:28 |
