| 5 Mar 2026 |
 emily | we did just land the eval warning for x86_64-darwin | 15:37:14 |
| emily | need to get back to my stack that rips it out for 26.05 soon | 15:37:25 |
 vcunat | Maybe the last couple of cycles were slower for darwin, but it seems so now even for staging-next-25.11 and this kind of changes weren't backported, right? | 15:37:46 |
| vcunat | * Maybe the last couple of cycles felt slower for darwin, but it seems so now even for staging-next-25.11 and this kind of changes weren't backported, right? | 15:37:56 |
| emily | the change hit 25.11 | 15:38:10 |
| emily | so it was already present at release, AIUI | 15:38:20 |
| vcunat | Oh, OK. | 15:38:20 |
| emily | so if 25.11 got slower and wasn't always slow then it's probably not that | 15:38:33 |
| emily | but if 25.11 was always slower than 25.05 it could be that | 15:38:39 |
| emily | (unless it's "got slower once the builders were updated to 25.11" 😅) | 15:39:23 |
| vcunat | October was quite a long ago. | 15:39:31 |
| emily | last couple cycles sounds more like OS upgrade to me, though I forget when the last one of those was. | 15:39:42 |
| vcunat | I mean, if it's a nixpkgs change, you could pick a random package and measure the time a year ago and now. | 15:40:30 |
| vcunat | If it's a well measurable difference, then even bisection is viable. | 15:40:50 |
| vcunat | (--first-parent bisection might be relatively low-effort) | 15:41:38 |
| vcunat | (until you hit a staging* merge - and then it's harder to dig inside) | 15:42:18 |
| emily | right. I probably shouldn't get sidetracked investigating right now, was just wondering if there was anything obvious I could correlate with when things started to get slower | 15:42:19 |
| vcunat | * (until you hit the staging* merge containing the regression - and then it's harder to dig inside) | 15:42:34 |
| vcunat | No, I don't think we have that. | 15:42:50 |
 Gaétan Lepage | Learned about this. Good to hear! x86_64-darwin is quite a burden TBH.
Just to be sure, we are expected to "stop caring (as much)" about this platform after the 26.05 branch off, right?
| 18:11:41 |
 Ihar Hrachyshka | for master yes; there will be support for 26.05 for its cycle | 18:12:28 |
 antifuchs | reminds me I should finally disable the aarch64-darwin/x86_64-darwin dual system setup I have on my macs | 18:39:24 |
| 6 Mar 2026 |
 alexfmpe | trying to build pkgsStatic.perl on aarch64-darwin gives me
/nix/store/3zrx6av2d1141igkcn8477cvbfqpcmcf-bash-5.3p9/bin/bash: line 1: ranlib: command not found | 11:55:40 |
| alexfmpe | and sure enough, ranlib is present in nix-shell for perl but not pkgsStatic.perl | 11:56:10 |
| alexfmpe | is this expected? intended? | 11:56:26 |
 symphorien | it's probably prefixed, as it is cross | 13:00:05 |
| symphorien | maybe replace by $RANLIB | 13:00:22 |
|  ragdoc joined the room. | 15:12:36 |
| ragdoc | Greetings. I am currently struggling with getting a package.nix I created tied into my nix-darwin flake.nix. Is this documented somewhere I might have missed? I can build the package manually, but I would prefer to have that happen as part of each darwin-rebuild operation. | 15:20:39 |
 samasaur | as in you have a package.nix file and you have a packages flake output that calls that package, so you can nix build it, but you want to know how to call that package from your nix-darwin configuration? | 15:22:28 |
