| 20 Oct 2024 |
 hellwolf | never mind, updated the flake inputs and all good again :/ | 20:34:38 |
| hellwolf | * never mind, I updated the flake inputs and all good again :/ | 20:34:46 |
| hellwolf | it looks like that the flake.lock added a new field "revCount", not sure if that's something new expected by the cppnix | 20:35:29 |
 colemickens | In reply to @colemickens:matrix.org
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/349249 I find it interesting fedora only has 1.6 in an unreleased version, Arch is still on 1.5.x | 23:30:30 |
| colemickens | Kinda looks like ubuntu might have 1.6.x in a release though. :| | 23:31:04 |
| 21 Oct 2024 |
 夜坂雅 | https://github.com/bitwarden/clients/issues/11611 Guess no bitwarden-desktop-2024.10.1 in Nixpkgs for now 😶
| 00:19:03 |
| 夜坂雅 | * | 00:19:24 |
 hexa | let's chill a bit and wait out what happens | 00:19:28 |
|  @ironicbadger:matrix.org left the room. | 00:27:38 |
 titaniumtown (they/them) | In reply to @shadowrz:nixos.dev
https://github.com/bitwarden/clients/issues/11611 😶 very scary :( | 00:34:12 |
| 夜坂雅 | In reply to@titaniumtown:envs.net
very scary :( From the Nixpkgs perspective, I don't think it would badly affect packaging, the worst thing that may happen is just the client might became lib.licenses.unfree and that's all I think? | 00:38:33 |
| titaniumtown (they/them) | yea i guess. sad it's maybe becoming non-free software tho | 00:38:54 |
 Emma [it/its] | In reply to @shadowrz:nixos.dev
From the Nixpkgs perspective, I don't think it would badly affect packaging, the worst thing that may happen is just the client might became lib.licenses.unfree and that's all I think? which also means no build cache iirc | 00:43:58 |
 mjm | bitwarden desktop is pretty quick to build without cache | 00:44:26 |
| hexa | not really dev content | 00:46:29 |
| hexa | please take it elsewhere | 00:46:34 |
| 夜坂雅 | Oh BTW seems like I need to check whether I can see new messages in Nix Offtopic room | 00:55:29 |
 Tethys Svensson | In reply to @qyliss:fairydust.space
I thought we were doing top-level packages for all the different binutils targets? Ah, right. That's what we agreed upon. Some questions in that case:
- Which architectures do we want to include at the top-level? The same ones needed for pwntools?
- Where do I put the derivation?
- What should the packages be called?
| 05:26:30 |
 aleksana (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC) | I'm thinking of removing fetchbzr. It doesn't have a lot of consumers in Nixpkgs, no documentation, and r-ryantm doesn't handle it correctly https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/143377/files | 08:39:00 |
 infinisil | In reply to @aleksana:mozilla.org
I'm thinking of removing fetchbzr. It doesn't have a lot of consumers in Nixpkgs, no documentation, and r-ryantm doesn't handle it correctly https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/143377/files Do a global search (e.g. GitHub) too, there might be third-party consumers. I'd also do some research why it was added originally | 08:42:27 |
| aleksana (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC) | Seems like launchpad doesn't convert older repos to Git, but newer repos do | 08:43:38 |
| aleksana (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC) | https://code.launchpad.net/timezonemap
This one doesn't have Git support | 08:44:43 |
| aleksana (force me to bed after 18:00 UTC) | https://code.launchpad.net/gweled
This does | 08:44:54 |
 emily | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
Do a global search (e.g. GitHub) too, there might be third-party consumers. I'd also do some research why it was added originally Bazaar is unmaintained | 08:50:55 |
| emily | there is however the Breezy fork https://www.breezy-vcs.org/ | 08:51:08 |
| emily | ah, which our fetchbzr uses | 08:52:57 |
| emily | I suspect the Bazaar repository format is more marginal than e.g. Pijul at this point. I'd be shocked if there are actively-developed projects using it | 08:54:56 |
|  @lightyisreal:envs.net joined the room. | 08:55:51 |
| @lightyisreal:envs.net left the room. | 08:57:39 |
 Alyssa Ross | In reply to @luckytethys:matrix.org
Ah, right. That's what we agreed upon. Some questions in that case:
- Which architectures do we want to include at the top-level? The same ones needed for pwntools?
- Where do I put the derivation?
- What should the packages be called?
Architectures needed for pwntools makes sense. We can always add more later. I would call each of the packages -binutils, since that matches the convention usually followed by the binaries. Do you think it would be possible to use overrides with the existing binutils expression? Would be nice to avoid duplication.
| 10:42:19 |
