| 13 Aug 2025 |
 Grimmauld (any/all) | but also, do we actually need samba in the iso? | 17:37:10 |
 ElvishJerricco | is that only there because of zfs or does something else pull it in? | 17:37:31 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | its in top-level | 17:37:44 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | as in, systemPackages or something | 17:37:50 |
| ElvishJerricco | huh... | 17:37:53 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | unless i am reading nix-tree wrong, which is not impossible | 17:38:11 |
 K900 | I think we do because you may want to copy stuff from a Windows share | 17:38:33 |
| K900 | To the ISO | 17:38:38 |
| ElvishJerricco | that sounds like a use case we shouldn't actually give a shit about lol | 17:38:56 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | no, its kdenetwork-filesharing turning on samba apparently? | 17:39:25 |
| ElvishJerricco | I dunno how possible it is to get samba out of zfs though; I know no one who uses zfs thinks you should use its smb features | 17:39:44 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | * ~~no, its kdenetwork-filesharing turning on samba apparently?~~ wrong direction | 17:44:34 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | nix why-depends is utterly useless with the iso, it looses all knowledge about dependency chains... | 17:44:54 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | * nix why-depends is utterly useless with the iso, it looses knowledge about dependency chains... | 17:44:59 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | i guess throw+show-trace will tell me where its actually coming from | 17:46:41 |
| ElvishJerricco | yea you need to build the toplevel attribute and work against that, not the iso derivation | 17:46:41 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | oh, gvfs pulls samba | 17:47:20 |
| ElvishJerricco | yea that makes sense | 17:47:48 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | because gnome-shell -> evolution-data-server -> gnome-online-accounts -> gvfs | 17:48:49 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | i suppose samba pulls the python only for its tools, so we might be fine if we split the libs into a lib output? | 17:49:27 |
| ElvishJerricco | there's no way that's the only reason we depend on python, right? | 17:50:20 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | no, but samba builds its own weird python | 17:50:32 |
| ElvishJerricco | oh | 17:50:38 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/005433b926e16227259a1843015b5b2b7f7d1fc3/pkgs/servers/samba/4.x.nix#L70-L76
this is why we have two pythons | 17:50:50 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | we could try to update samba and hope the tool updated... | 17:51:19 |
| ElvishJerricco | yea I was going to say, ideally we would just not need that override | 17:51:51 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | Actually: samba-tool only exists in samba4Full, we could certainly do the hacky thing and make the overlay conditional on -full | 17:52:41 |
| ElvishJerricco | I mean all these things sounds like plusses to me; split libs, get rid of override if it's not needed, make it conditional on -full otherwise | 17:53:53 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | pain is, the nixos test doesn't actually test samba-tool | 17:54:25 |
 emily | probably just only use the override for samba-tool specifically | 17:54:16 |
