| 12 Jan 2026 |
 hexa (UTC+1) | slight preference | 15:54:13 |
| hexa (UTC+1) | because while these were 500-1000 builds they gravitated to the more annoying end of builds | 15:54:29 |
 Gaétan Lepage | Ok, I'll target staging-next once I'm done building for all platforms | 15:55:50 |
 connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Any thoughts on whether it’s suitable for backport to 25.11? Would unbreak CUDA 13 functionality there which I welcome | 17:09:22 |
| 13 Jan 2026 |
 Alexandros Liarokapis | what do I use as inputs and nixpkgs config to get cached ucc with cuda support? | 23:00:25 |
| Alexandros Liarokapis | what I did was use https://hydra.nixos-cuda.org/build/63411#tabs-buildinputs for nixpkgs input, then instantiate only with allowUnfree and cudaSupport = true; | 23:01:46 |
| Alexandros Liarokapis | nvm my user nix config was overriding my systems's cache | 23:13:26 |
| 14 Jan 2026 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | I didn't realize that by making TensorRT 10.14.1 the default I effectively broke aarch64-linux (non Jetson) builds using TensorRT since NVIDIA didn't make a release for that platform for CUDA 12 -- it's CUDA 13 only.
So... do I roll back the version of TensorRT on aarch64-linux for CUDA 12.x or do something else? It'd need to get backported to the release branch to unbreak that.
10.13.0 has support for aarch64-linux for CUDA 12, but it was removed in 10.13.2 (there is no 10.13.1 release I can find). | 00:33:23 |
 yorik.sar | So they removed support for a whole version+platform in a patch release? That’s not nice. | 04:45:45 |
| yorik.sar | I think we’d need 2 versions then - one for aarch64, one for the rest. | 04:46:34 |
| 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 |
