| 12 Jul 2024 |
 Mindavi | In reply to @trofi:matrix.org
all separateDebugInfo = true; packages (like glibc) are also affected as they encode into binary a checksum of debug sections in .debug.link section, those almost always contain $out :) Looked into that again yesterday but couldn't find a solution yet :( | 14:57:20 |
 trofi | There probably is no simple solution. -ggdb2 vs -ggdb3 are expected to produce different debug infos even if binaries are identical otherwise. I personally disable separateDebugInfo locally (and use --build-id=none while at it as it has identical problem for CA derivations). | 15:04:36 |
| Mindavi | Locally I also do some hacks, but would still love to fix it upstream somehow | 15:09:59 |
| 13 Jul 2024 |
|  jopejoe1 (4094@eh22) joined the room. | 10:17:56 |
| 14 Jul 2024 |
|  tewi 🏳️⚧️ joined the room. | 16:38:15 |
|  Lan Tian joined the room. | 22:19:04 |
| 15 Jul 2024 |
|  @dminca:matrix.org changed their display name from dminca to nixpkgs. | 17:28:48 |
| @dminca:matrix.org changed their display name from nixpkgs to dminca. | 17:42:26 |
| tewi 🏳️⚧️ changed their display name from tewi to tewi 🏳️⚧️. | 20:45:56 |
| 16 Jul 2024 |
| tewi 🏳️⚧️ changed their profile picture. | 07:25:35 |
|  Marius changed their display name from Burrito (Marius) to Marius. | 12:16:17 |
 bl0v3 | 
Download image.png | 21:20:24 |
| bl0v3 | currently packaging zipl the s390x / Z mainframe bootloader | 21:21:08 |
| bl0v3 | but i wonder, since zipl only compiles for s390x <not x86> like the makefile ibm wrote intentionally refuses to build useful stuff for x86 ... | 21:22:39 |
| bl0v3 | would i even get this merged into nixpkgs since it supports neither x86 nor arm | 21:22:59 |
| bl0v3 | this matters because in order to write a bootloader module one needs s390x | 21:24:16 |
| bl0v3 | * this matters because in order to write a bootloader module one needs zipl | 21:24:26 |
| bl0v3 | uboot seems to be present for x86 but also there is ubootQemuRiscv64Smode in nixpkgs | 21:26:18 |
| bl0v3 | does that mean that non supported architecture packages can make their way into nixpkgs? | 21:26:41 |
| bl0v3 | my question is: can I get a package that only compiles for s390x yet cross compiles on x86 into nixpkgs? As in if the outputs of the drv are native to s390x but can be build on x86 will I get that into nixpkgs?
since i need s390x-tools for zipl which i need for creating what grub does for nixos | 21:31:24 |
| bl0v3 | * my question is: can I get a package that only compiles for s390x yet cross compiles on x86 into nixpkgs? As in if the outputs of the drv are native to s390x but can be build on x86 will I get that into nixpkgs?
since i need s390x-tools for zipl which i need for creating what grub does on x86 nixos | 21:31:35 |
| bl0v3 | seems like I can get it into nixpkgs | 22:13:59 |
| 17 Jul 2024 |
 dramforever | In reply to @bl0v3:matrix.org
my question is: can I get a package that only compiles for s390x yet cross compiles on x86 into nixpkgs? As in if the outputs of the drv are native to s390x but can be build on x86 will I get that into nixpkgs?
since i need s390x-tools for zipl which i need for creating what grub does on x86 nixos yes feel free to do so, just set meta.platforms to whatever s390x is | 05:26:18 |
| dramforever | also nice username | 05:26:22 |
 artemist | nixpkgs has packages only for x86_64-freebsd, stuff for weird platforms is fine as long as it's not breaking more normal linux | 05:55:07 |
| bl0v3 | In reply to @dramforever:matrix.org
also nice username legacy reasons, these days koishi new fav | 11:04:48 |
| bl0v3 | In reply to @artemist:mildlyfunctional.gay
nixpkgs has packages only for x86_64-freebsd, stuff for weird platforms is fine as long as it's not breaking more normal linux no it would be an isolated package | 11:06:06 |
| bl0v3 | In reply to @dramforever:matrix.org
yes feel free to do so, just set meta.platforms to whatever s390x is i see yeah | 11:06:18 |
| bl0v3 | currently dealing with python as they fixed a bug in 3.12 and later which issentially requires a patch for cross compilation | 11:08:38 |
| bl0v3 | though that patch uses stdenv.hostplatform.isAarch64 isAarch32 isRiscV etc ... which is probably a bad way to go on about this issue since it explititly hardcodes the architectures which the patch is available for rather than saying whenevr this sort of cross compilation scenario is present | 11:10:31 |
