| 23 Feb 2024 |
 maralorn | Also if you find some solution which could reasonably be upstreamed into nixpkgs, that would be awesome. | 16:30:14 |
| maralorn | K900 ⚡️: I also think so. | 16:30:35 |
 K900 | I've read nixos-rebuild like two days ago | 16:31:07 |
| 25 Feb 2024 |
|  @qbit:tapenet.org joined the room. | 20:14:06 |
| @qbit:tapenet.org | hi! | 20:14:34 |
| @qbit:tapenet.org | is there a way to completely disable color output? | 20:14:44 |
| maralorn | qbit: Currently not, now. | 21:57:23 |
| maralorn | Why would you want that? | 21:57:33 |
| maralorn | incidentally: Even if I disable the colors in nom the nix build log could still contain colors. | 21:58:00 |
| maralorn | You can open a feature request issue on github. | 21:58:52 |
| maralorn | Currently nom is not very configurable, but once it is a flag like that would be easy to add. | 21:59:16 |
| @qbit:tapenet.org | In reply to @maralorn:maralorn.de
Why would you want that? Lots of reasons - big ones being color blind people and non-dark terminals | 22:06:29 |
| maralorn | qbit: Fair, it’s a reasonable request and I will provide that nob when I get to it. Just wanted to point out that both of these scenarios can imo be solved by configuring a good color theme in the terminal. The nom color theme is not optimized for dark terminals, in fact I developed it on a light terminal. nom only uses the 16 basic colors which are set by the terminal. Imo every user should set those default colors to a palette which provides a good contrast in their setup. Although I assume for color blind people that’s likely not completely achievable … | 22:14:48 |
| @qbit:tapenet.org | Not sure what color lib is in use but a number of them support the NO_COLOR env var: http://no-color.org/ | 22:31:56 |
| maralorn | qbit: Well, our library doesn’t support it. But implementing that standard seems very reasonable and not hard at all. | 22:56:38 |
| maralorn | http://no-color.org/ | 23:39:26 |
| maralorn | * https://github.com/maralorn/nix-output-monitor/issues/129 | 23:39:34 |
| 29 Feb 2024 |
|  maka_77x joined the room. | 00:52:08 |
| 14 Mar 2024 |
|  @federicodschonborn:matrix.org left the room. | 02:04:51 |
|  NixOS Moderation Botchanged room power levels. | 18:44:18 |
| 15 Mar 2024 |
|  @grahamc:nixos.org joined the room. | 23:54:22 |
| 19 Mar 2024 |
| NixOS Moderation Botchanged room power levels. | 00:29:44 |
| 21 Mar 2024 |
| NixOS Moderation Botchanged room power levels. | 18:02:41 |
| @grahamc:nixos.org left the room. | 20:10:05 |
| 23 Mar 2024 |
| @federicodschonborn:matrix.org joined the room. | 00:39:50 |
| 25 Mar 2024 |
 Philip Taron (UTC-8) | I'm testing out https://github.com/maralorn/nix-output-monitor/pull/123 and running into the same effect that you did, maralorn. But a quick grep of the project doesn't reveal what's outputting the "Finished at" text. | 16:09:18 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Ah, found it. lib/NOM/Print.hs line 3 | 16:12:02 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | * Ah, found it. lib/NOM/Print.hs line 179 | 16:12:13 |
| 26 Mar 2024 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Yeah, that PR just doesn't work, and I don't think I can get it to work. | 19:27:58 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | maralorn: I did open a PR against the GitHub repo for some strings. https://github.com/maralorn/nix-output-monitor/pull/131
I didn't see a way to open a PR against your forgejo instance.
| 19:28:26 |
