| 28 Oct 2024 |
 loudgolem | got it. I guess I was mistaken about the 129mb limit, thanks | 16:57:34 |
| loudgolem | * got it. I guess I was also mistaken about the 129mb limit, thanks | 16:57:40 |
 @philip4g:matrix.org | Is there any opportunity for me to contribute my Mac hardware (Intel or ARM) for NixOS automated builds? | 22:39:06 |
 @adam:robins.wtf | In what capacity? | 22:54:09 |
| 29 Oct 2024 |
 Mindavi | Possibly for ofborg and no for hydra, I think | 21:45:22 |
| 30 Oct 2024 |
| @philip4g:matrix.org | In reply to @adam:robins.wtf
In what capacity? I heard that there is a shortage of Mac hardware in OfBorg, causing auto builds to take a very long time. I have some hardware that OfBorg could use remotely, if such a decentralized solution is feasible. | 18:38:47 |
| @adam:robins.wtf | Is it Apple Silicon? Would you be willing to give over administrative control? (not sure if this is a requirement or not) | 18:50:04 |
| 2 Nov 2024 |
 Find me at aleksana:qaq.li | Ofborg eval seems to be blocked again? (How do we check queue status?) | 15:56:05 |
 hexa | url in th e topic | 16:01:55 |
| hexa | * url in the topic | 16:01:58 |
| Find me at aleksana:qaq.li | In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
url in th e topic The evaluation queue, not build queue | 16:45:58 |
| hexa | the upper graph | 16:46:14 |
| hexa |
ofborg_queue_evaluator_waiting
| 16:46:21 |
| Find me at aleksana:qaq.li | Oh I see | 16:50:58 |
| @adam:robins.wtf | 
Download image.png | 17:57:53 |
| @adam:robins.wtf | this doesn't seem sustainable | 17:58:01 |
 Artturin | We need nuclear ofborg | 17:58:23 |
| @adam:robins.wtf | the many hours wait just to get the ofborg eval is starting to become annoying | 21:30:05 |
 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 |
