| 11 Nov 2025 |
 maralorn | To confirm this I would have to see nix derivation show and nix path-info --json of the derivation which lost its child node. | 22:43:18 |
| 12 Nov 2025 |
| maralorn | After again, not being able to sleep because I couldn’t stop thinking about this problem I think it might not be #96 after all. | 03:51:36 |
| maralorn | I don’t get it. I have been staring at replace-dependencies.nix for a while now and it is apparently breaking a lot of assumptions that "normal" packages uphold but I can’t figure out which assumption of nom it is breaking. | 04:16:38 |
| maralorn | I would need to write a nix expression which I can easily build and stare at the .drv files. | 04:17:43 |
| maralorn | Generally I’d say: When the build tree is flat, then the build tree is actually flat. i.e. whichever derivation is waiting for freecad to be built somehow does not list the freecad derivation as one of its inputs. | 04:19:14 |
| maralorn | Which confuses the heck out of me, because how does nix even know then that they depend on each other? | 04:19:53 |
| maralorn | By reverse lookup from storepaths to derivation? | 04:20:06 |
| maralorn | * By reverse lookup from storepaths to derivations? | 04:20:09 |
| maralorn | Grimmauld (any/all): Feel free to open an issue about this. And if you can give me a minimal reproducer that would increase the likelihood of me looking into this further. | 04:21:29 |
|  saygo.2 joined the room. | 07:25:21 |
| saygo.2 | @maralorn:maralorn.de: I want to try moving argument parsing to the optparse-applicative library. Is this something you want in nom?
(Emphasis on try) | 07:33:46 |
| saygo.2 | i know there is an old issue about this but i'm not sure if its still the case | 07:35:15 |
| saygo.2 | * i know there is an old issue about wanting optparse-applicative but i'm not sure if its still the case | 07:35:58 |
| maralorn | Sure. Just be smart about I.e. don't reimplement the nix arguments for those we need a blind passthrough | 08:10:21 |
|  Inayet changed their display name from inayet to Inayet. | 12:37:09 |
| maralorn | saygo.2: And in regards to "try"-ing I’d be more than happy to help/mentor. | 18:03:55 |
| maralorn | Besides that. People let’s brainstorm: What is the fanciest progress bar you have ever seen in a terminal application? I wanna steal it! | 18:06:02 |
 Albert Larsan | I really like the one from cargo, as it is useful without being distracting | 18:13:42 |
| 15 Nov 2025 |
 K900 | 
Download image.png | 09:48:30 |
| K900 | I feel like having progress bars for builds might be too much lol | 09:48:39 |
| maralorn | You mean because it is too much guessing. 😄 | 09:51:45 |
| K900 | Yeah mostly | 10:01:26 |
| K900 | (this particular case was a nixos test running concurrently with like 50 other things) | 10:01:38 |
| maralorn | idk | 10:02:01 |
| maralorn | I find it kinda cute.^^ | 10:02:14 |
| maralorn | But I can remove it again. | 10:02:24 |
| K900 | Also probably need to adjust progressbar width so the numbers fit if they get really long | 10:03:22 |
 Grimmauld (any/all) | yeah the remaining time estimate is a bit wonky on overloaded systems. It might make sense to look at the load average of past builds, and adjust time eta according to current load average. But that probably also gets wildly inaccurate. | 10:09:57 |
 Emma [it/its] | progress bars for builds 👀👀👀👀👀👀👀👀👀👀 | 10:10:44 |
| Emma [it/its] | * progress bars for builds 👀👀👀👀👀👀👀 | 10:11:00 |
