| 9 Oct 2025 |
 raitobezarius | can you try to order a revert of the suspected commit and rerun the CI for you? | 19:45:15 |
| raitobezarius | There's unaddressed comments on the CL, hence why it stalled | 19:45:46 |
| raitobezarius | Ah, I understood | 19:46:33 |
| raitobezarius | That's terrifying :( | 19:46:36 |
| raitobezarius | I will try to prioritize looking into that | 19:46:42 |
 Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Yeah, I saw that -- I'm asking if my summary of the feedback, the bullet points, still represents the thinking of the team. | 20:22:28 |
 jade_ | nixpkgs really needs to stop using those environment variables and do it with the arg instead, and that's going to be a compat hazard in the migration period between now and later. it's a shame we didn't get to fixing this in nixpkgs 10 months ago e.g. with feature detection, but alas. | 20:36:50 |
| jade_ | in fact, nixpkgs should just set the NIX_CONFIG debug-on-warn thing assuming it is matched between cppnix and lix, imo | 20:37:30 |
| jade_ | * in fact, nixpkgs should just set the NIX_CONFIG abort-on-warn thing assuming it is matched between cppnix and lix, imo | 20:37:56 |
| jade_ | I would appreciate this being fixed in nixpkgs' test suite before we can release this feature into GA | 20:38:24 |
| jade_ | * I would appreciate this being fixed in nixpkgs' test suite before we can release this feature into GA, because it means that it avoids a period of nixpkgs CI not working properly. | 20:38:47 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | I'm in the channel in part because I was grossed out by the code in Nixpkgs. | 21:02:24 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | The code we're talking about is this function, right? | 21:08:07 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | That codepath is only lit up for Lix, since every supported cppnix has builtins.warn. | 21:08:45 |
