| 2 Nov 2024 |
 Tristan Ross | I've just been running nixpkgs-review on my system but yeah, waiting for Ofborg isn't great. | 21:36:31 |
| 3 Nov 2024 |
 Bot_wxt1221 | Could we move some aarch64-linux builder as evaluator | 09:20:04 |
 hexa | no, we can't magic resources into existance | 15:04:32 |
| Tristan Ross | In reply to @bot-wxt1221:matrix.org
Could we move some aarch64-linux builder as evaluator I think this has already been talked about. | 15:20:34 |
| Tristan Ross | Looking at the Prometheus graph, we really are lacking that bad with aarch64-darwin? | 15:39:47 |
 @adam:robins.wtf | Have been for a long time | 17:23:27 |
|  Matteo Pacini changed their profile picture. | 21:50:27 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | In reply to @rosscomputerguy:matrix.org
I think this has already been talked about. So what, we have more aarch64-linux builder that we need. There's no tasks wating for aarch64-linux. Anyway, evaluator is more meaningful than builder. We can run nixpkgs-review locally but without ofborg. It's really slow. It takes about 1 hour on my computer. | 23:48:33 |
| Tristan Ross | In reply to @bot-wxt1221:matrix.org
So what, we have more aarch64-linux builder that we need. There's no tasks wating for aarch64-linux. Anyway, evaluator is more meaningful than builder. We can run nixpkgs-review locally but without ofborg. It's really slow. It takes about 1 hour on my computer. Idk, using aarch64-linux to eval for aarch64-darwin doesn't feel right lol. Ideally it should evaluate the same but what if it doesn't? | 23:52:29 |
| Tristan Ross | The better solution would probably be to get rid of some aarch64-linux machines replace them with Darwin ones. | 23:53:48 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | In reply to @rosscomputerguy:matrix.org
Idk, using aarch64-linux to eval for aarch64-darwin doesn't feel right lol. Ideally it should evaluate the same but what if it doesn't? It is better to have it than there's no. It should be a bug in nix if we have different result if we evaluate on x86 and darwin. Anyway, if you are really worried about this. We can just run them in qemu. | 23:55:59 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | In reply to @rosscomputerguy:matrix.org
The better solution would probably be to get rid of some aarch64-linux machines replace them with Darwin ones. I think the most serious problem is about evaluator | 23:56:53 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | In reply to @rosscomputerguy:matrix.org
Idk, using aarch64-linux to eval for aarch64-darwin doesn't feel right lol. Ideally it should evaluate the same but what if it doesn't? * | 23:57:16 |
| Tristan Ross | In reply to @bot-wxt1221:matrix.org
It is better to have it than there's no. It should be a bug in nix if we have different result if we evaluate on x86 and darwin. Anyway, if you are really worried about this. We can just run them in qemu. You can't emulate Darwin without breaking the terms | 23:57:31 |
| Tristan Ross | So that's a no | 23:57:38 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | In reply to @rosscomputerguy:matrix.org
You can't emulate Darwin without breaking the terms I mean aarch64. Sorry for wrong typing | 23:57:53 |
| Tristan Ross | The system name holds both the arch and OS so still that could introduce problems if there is a bug. | 23:58:50 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | How about run a full VM? | 23:59:26 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | Anyway, I don't think we should discuss about a bug which doesn't know if it exist. | 23:59:50 |
| 4 Nov 2024 |
| Tristan Ross | Still can't emulate aarch64-darwin | 00:00:04 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | So could we solve the problem of evaluator? | 00:00:34 |
| Tristan Ross | In reply to @bot-wxt1221:matrix.org
Anyway, I don't think we should discuss about a bug which doesn't know if it exist. Afaik, @k900:0upti.me has mentioned impurities but idk if that affects the evaluator | 00:00:43 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | Tristan RossRun a full VM will solve it.
| 00:01:22 |
| Bot_wxt1221 | Even though it is really slow, it is better than nothing. | 00:01:48 |
| Tristan Ross | In reply to @bot-wxt1221:matrix.org
Tristan RossRun a full VM will solve it.
Of aarch64-darwin? | 00:02:35 |
