| 20 Jan 2026 |
 kaya š¤ | GaĆ©tan Lepage: Thank you for the through PR review, much appreciated! | 19:03:45 |
 GaƩtan Lepage | You're welcome! I'll probably wait for a second committer to double check, but we should be able to merge it soon :) | 19:26:32 |
| 21 Jan 2026 |
 connor (he/him) | GaĆ©tan Lepageif you havenāt already, can you link any of the additional work youāve had to do for the OpenCV version bump in the PR description? I remember yesterday you had mentioned needing to fix protobuf, but that might have been about ONNX Runtime. | 17:20:11 |
| GaƩtan Lepage | Indeed, this was for protobuf. The opencv effort is all contained in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/479136 | 21:33:06 |
| GaƩtan Lepage | The protobuf patching related to onnxruntime was merged into staging.
-> https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/480716 | 21:33:34 |
| 22 Jan 2026 |
| GaƩtan Lepage | Sadness.
I had to package the 12.8 version of cuda-bindings, because we're on cuda 12.8.
However, it dlopens libcuda.so and the driver (on my system at least) tells it that it uses cuda 13.1.
Hence, it errors out :/
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/482638
(cuda-bindings is supposed to be required in the new torch update, not sure how critical it is though) | 12:06:42 |
 Kevin Mittman (UTC-8) | Hmm a bit confused about that issue, as nvidia-smi shows the maximum CUDA version supported and with "backwards compat" should always be able to use a newer NVIDIA driver than a CUDA Toolkit was released with | 20:14:30 |
| GaƩtan Lepage | The version detection logic happens here and errors out here. | 20:48:39 |
| GaƩtan Lepage | Here's the stack trace when I re-enable the failing test:
______________________ ERROR collecting test_nvjitlink.py ______________________
tests/test_nvjitlink.py:62: in <module>
not check_nvjitlink_usable(), reason="nvJitLink not usable, maybe not installed or too old (<12.3)"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
tests/test_nvjitlink.py:58: in check_nvjitlink_usable
return inner_nvjitlink._inspect_function_pointer("__nvJitLinkVersion") != 0
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
cuda/bindings/_internal/nvjitlink.pyx:254: in cuda.bindings._internal.nvjitlink._inspect_function_pointer
???
cuda/bindings/_internal/nvjitlink.pyx:257: in cuda.bindings._internal.nvjitlink._inspect_function_pointer
???
cuda/bindings/_internal/nvjitlink.pyx:205: in cuda.bindings._internal.nvjitlink._inspect_function_pointers
???
cuda/bindings/_internal/nvjitlink.pyx:99: in cuda.bindings._internal.nvjitlink._check_or_init_nvjitlink
???
cuda/bindings/_internal/nvjitlink.pyx:57: in cuda.bindings._internal.nvjitlink.load_library
???
cuda/bindings/_internal/utils.pyx:137: in cuda.bindings._internal.utils.get_nvjitlink_dso_version_suffix
???
E cuda.bindings._internal.utils.NotSupportedError: only CUDA 12 driver is supported
------------------------------- Captured stdout --------------------------------
+++++++++++++++ 13010
| 22:27:19 |
| GaƩtan Lepage | The code block mentionned above returns 13010 which fails the 12000 <= driver_ver < 13000 check in cuda/bindings/_internal/utils.pyx. | 22:28:37 |
| 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 |
| tpw_rules | i think i mixed my metaphors slightly. i don't intend to put words in his mouth | 03:40:00 |
