| 13 Sep 2025 |
 emily | hmm I think that wasn't there when I was looking at 2.93 :) | 05:24:18 |
| emily | we could just patch that in Nixpkgs, though? | 05:24:45 |
| emily | oh I guess it's breaking-ish | 05:24:53 |
| emily | sure then | 05:24:57 |
 K900 | Uhh is Lix on unstable also broken now | 15:33:45 |
| emily | are you running into the CMake 4 thing | 15:45:57 |
| K900 | No | 15:48:59 |
| K900 | toml11 | 15:49:02 |
| K900 | Wait no | 15:49:05 |
| K900 | Lowdown | 15:49:07 |
| K900 | I think | 15:49:08 |
 ghpzin | https://hydra.nixos.org/job/nixos/trunk-combined/nixpkgs.lix.x86_64-linux
https://hydra.nixos.org/build/307566238
lix/libcmd/liblixcmd.so.p/markdown.cc.o -c ../lix/libcmd/markdown.cc
../lix/libcmd/markdown.cc:18:10: error: field designator 'cols' does not refer to any field in type 'struct lowdown_opts'
18 | .cols = (size_t) std::max(windowWidth - 5, 60),
| ~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../lix/libcmd/markdown.cc:19:10: error: field designator 'hmargin' does not refer to any field in type 'struct lowdown_opts'
19 | .hmargin = 0,
| ~^~~~~~~~~~~
../lix/libcmd/markdown.cc:20:10: error: field designator 'vmargin' does not refer to any field in type 'struct lowdown_opts'
20 | .vmargin = 0,
| ~^~~~~~~~~~~
3 errors generated.
| 15:49:49 |
 raitobezarius | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/442624/files | 16:18:40 |
| raitobezarius | * https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/442624 FYI | 16:18:43 |
 Marie | Am I supposed to do the gerrit suggest owners thing and add reviewers?
Or just be patient and wait for someone to look at it? | 17:34:18 |
| raitobezarius | Yes, you need to use code owners | 19:52:27 |
| Marie | oh, okay
It lists 3 people as code owners for my CL on release-2.93, but it doesn't list anyone on the one for main | 20:28:10 |
| raitobezarius | Hm surprising | 21:44:01 |
| 14 Sep 2025 |
 aloisw | Hm maybe the * in the code owners file doesn't work, and on 2.93 where there are no owners it falls back to the core team? | 06:55:38 |
| aloisw | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/435108#issuecomment-3289131700 did they fix the Ubuntu sandbox breakage on the other side of the fork? | 07:03:46 |
|  Federico Damián Schonborn (he/they) changed their profile picture. | 07:26:43 |
| raitobezarius | by sandbox breakage, are you thinking of the apparmor shaped things? | 12:15:25 |
| aloisw | Yes, precisely. The nix builds succeed per that comment so they must be doing something differently. | 12:37:13 |
| emily | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/443012 would be good if someone could check my work (haven't verified the build) | 22:08:00 |
| 15 Sep 2025 |
 jade_ | yup. i think we might want to just throw a * into the codeowners of maintenance branches | 06:45:34 |
| aloisw | Well that doesn't seem to work at all per the behaviour observed by Marie. | 07:02:24 |
| jade_ | right, the codeowners plugin is set up in our configuration to fail closed | 07:49:58 |
| jade_ | we need to introduce an OWNERS file on the maintenance branches that just allows anyone with +2 to +2 anything because they're just maintenance branches | 07:50:28 |
| jade_ | i didn't see a CL to put an OWNERS file on release-*, which is probably why it is jacked | 07:51:06 |
| jade_ | or we could also add an exclusion in the config of release-* from codeowners entirely | 07:51:18 |
