!lymvtcwDJ7ZA9Npq:lix.systems

Lix Development

409 Members
(Technical) development of Lix, the package manager, a Nix implementation. Please be mindful of ongoing technical conversations in this channel.139 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
28 Aug 2025
@charles:computer.surgeryCharles changed their profile picture.17:59:27
@jade_:matrix.orgjade_this is plausibly safe. Let me file a ticket22:57:17
@jade_:matrix.orgjade_https://git.lix.systems/lix-project/lix/issues/98322:58:39
29 Aug 2025
@charles:computer.surgeryCharles changed their profile picture.19:12:26
30 Aug 2025
@522_:catgirl.cloud522 it/its ⛯ΘΔ changed their display name from 522 [it/its][ΘΔ] to 522 it/its ⛯ΘΔ.14:10:43
@piegames:flausch.socialpiegamesWhoever touched the fromTOML tests recently, I need your help https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/412214:46:38
@just1602:systemli.orgjust1602Redacted or Malformed Event15:35:07
@just1602:systemli.orgjust1602

In the CL where I try to bump nix 2.93.3 to nixpkgs 25.05, I get the following error and I'm wondering if I should look to drop the tests against 2.3 or allow it:

error: Package ‘nix-2.3.18’ in /nix/store/w6rvjvq81h9gsa14lbc8hpal78mhvjjv-source/pkgs/tools/package-management/nix/default.nix:156 is marked as insecure, refusing to evaluate.

15:44:41
@dawnofmidnight:catgirl.cloud@dawnofmidnight:catgirl.cloud joined the room.15:59:42
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilywhat's the issue?23:47:43
@emilazy:matrix.orgemily``tests/functional2/lang/builtins.fromTOML/in.nix` is probably not a good name for the expected-to-fail timestamps test23:48:50
@emilazy:matrix.orgemily * tests/functional2/lang/builtins.fromTOML/in.nix is probably not a good name for the expected-to-fail timestamps test 23:48:56
31 Aug 2025
@piegames:flausch.socialpiegames
In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
what's the issue?
Basically we have two fromTOML test folders in functional2, and another test in functional, which looks kinda duplicate but not really
06:18:30
@piegames:flausch.socialpiegamesAnd I remember stuff having been renamed and deleted here, so I think it might be a rebase artifact (even though I never saw any conflict), but overall I'm a bit confused what the currently intended end state for those tests is06:19:30
@emilazy:matrix.orgemily you might be thinking of https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/3917/11? 06:20:01
@emilazy:matrix.orgemily IIRC there is a weird thing where functional had one checking that timestamps work (with the experimental extension that has since been removed) and functional2 had one checking that they don't work (with the extension disabled), or something like that. 06:20:26
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilythe extension is gone so all timestamp tests should be testing the failure case06:20:37
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilyI don't think there should be any strict duplicates left06:21:03
@piegames:flausch.socialpiegames nix: error while loading shared libraries: liblowdown.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory nix dev build doesn't start anymore for me (I already rebased and reloaded env and rebuilt 07:20:20
@piegames:flausch.socialpiegames * nix: error while loading shared libraries: liblowdown.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory nix dev build doesn't start anymore for me (I already rebased and reloaded env and rebuilt) 07:20:23
@xokdvium:matrix.orgSergei Zimmerman (xokdvium)

What the actual fuck:

echo "1 + 2 + 5" | nix-instantiate --eval -E 'import (builtins.fetchurl { url = "file:///proc/self/fd/0"; })' --tarball-ttl 0
15:00:48
@xokdvium:matrix.orgSergei Zimmerman (xokdvium) *

What the actual fuck:

echo "1 + 2 + 5" | nix-instantiate --eval -E 'import (builtins.fetchurl { url = "file:///proc/self/fd/0"; })' --tarball-ttl 0

15:01:05
@xokdvium:matrix.orgSergei Zimmerman (xokdvium) And if the tarball-ttl isn't passed the result is cached... 15:01:50
@aloisw:julia0815.dealoiswLooks like working as intended tbh.15:04:16
@xokdvium:matrix.orgSergei Zimmerman (xokdvium)Well yeah, though I doubt it's by design15:05:11
@xokdvium:matrix.orgSergei Zimmerman (xokdvium)However this does actually expose the evaluation order. Depending on in which order thunks are forced this would produce different results hmmm15:06:47
@aloisw:julia0815.dealoiswThat's by far not the only thing exposing evaluation order. Other ways to read special files, symbol table order, …16:20:14
@aloisw:julia0815.dealoiswIt will also not work with pure eval mode, so this doesn't even look like silently breaking any purity guarantees.16:21:49
@aloisw:julia0815.dealoiswIf anything I would've expected it to fail due to some bullshit bug.16:22:33
@emilazy:matrix.orgemily I think builtins.fetchGit with a rev could break purity. 16:34:47

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 10