| 6 Sep 2025 |
 raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | and not any stub listener entry for IPv4 | 13:16:17 |
| raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | (due to the pasta bug) | 13:16:19 |
| raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | so everytime they gets redeployed for any reason, e.g. updates or anything, DNS resolution goes down | 13:16:42 |
 aloisw | Oh god systemd-resolved. I have removed that on all my systems due to being pretty garbage. (In my experience it would consistently SERVFAIL after a few hours though, instead of just stopping listening entirely.) | 13:17:06 |
| raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | hah, i wish there would be a good well integrated replacement to it | 13:17:35 |
| raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | (i don't feel like dnsmasq or kresd is that) | 13:17:48 |
 K900 | kresd is almost good tbh | 13:18:41 |
| K900 | Just impossible to debug | 13:18:45 |
| K900 | Supposedly fixed in v6 but I'm not going to find out | 13:18:55 |
| K900 | Possibly ever | 13:18:59 |
| aloisw | Well integrated in what sense? | 13:19:10 |
| raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | in the sense of supporting multiple interfaces | 13:19:26 |
| aloisw | What do you mean by "supporting multiple interfaces"? | 13:20:13 |
| raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | DNS server per link | 13:20:24 |
| aloisw | Also weird timeouts when the machine is offline. | 13:20:36 |
| aloisw | I'm not sure I understand what you would like to do there? | 13:22:59 |
| raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | systemd-resolved supports answering to DNS queries which are meant for a specific link with a DNS server specific to that link | 13:23:25 |
| raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | useful when you have a VPN with its own DNS server for internal zones | 13:23:37 |
| aloisw | So basically multiplexing between different upstreams, with both the zone and the upstream server assigned to the link in some way? | 13:29:06 |
| raitobezarius (DECT: 7248) | yep | 13:29:12 |
| aloisw | Yeah I'd not really expect unbound or knot-resolver to support that in a nice way indeed. Their expected use case seems more to let them do recursion themselves. | 13:31:00 |
| aloisw | I guess if the links are static, you could configure the forwarding manually. But it's going to be annoying if they can come and go dynamically. | 13:39:46 |
| 7 Sep 2025 |
 emily | raitobezarius: do you have an estimate for how soon you plan to amend the drop PR in Nixpkgs? | 02:35:38 |
| emily | would be great to move forward with toml11 and if 2.93 is all that's required there it would be convenient | 02:35:54 |
| emily | (or I could just mark the other ones broken :P) | 02:37:40 |
| aloisw | What do I have to enter into buildkite to manually start a job for a given CL again? I forgot whether to put the commit hash into its field and what to put in the branch. | 09:32:28 |
| aloisw | What the heck is going on here? That's nixpkgs 24.11 before the toml11 bump: https://buildkite.com/lix-project/lix/builds/4357#01992389-f64c-4437-a922-998d418e1dec/38-47 | 09:57:16 |
 Sergei Zimmerman (xokdvium) | 24.11 nixpkgsLibTests evalutated the misc.nix tests with the host nix, not the one that's being tested. Might be that the CI is dogfooding a recent build of Lix? | 10:06:29 |
| aloisw | Still happening on 25.05: https://buildkite.com/lix-project/lix/builds/4358#019923aa-4e21-4225-bfca-d98763a1e5da/30-39 | 10:55:39 |
| aloisw | Also aarch64-linux only, what the heck. | 10:56:01 |
