| 18 Jun 2025 |
 Find me at aleksana:qaq.li | In reply to @reckenrode:matrix.org
If someone later wants to take over one if these packages, would the stdenv team be dropped from them? Also the same | 17:35:40 |
| Find me at aleksana:qaq.li | We probably don't want to see someone who just added themselves to the maintainer list take up maintenance work, because merging r-ryantm unconditionally may still cause some chaos | 17:37:38 |
 Alyssa Ross | TBH you may be overestimating how much care goes into committer-merged updates to stdenv dependencies 😛 | 17:40:02 |
| Alyssa Ross | (Not saying this isn't a good idea) | 17:42:00 |
|  tomberek joined the room. | 17:45:59 |
| tomberek | Would the stdenv folks be interested in a relocatable store, a relocatable Nix? The SC is exploring this as a possible roadmap effort and a big part of it would be building some momentum with the core+stdenv that requires more specialized experience. Don't have all the details figured out, but trying to gauge the interest. | 17:57:09 |
| Alyssa Ross | There are situations where it would be useful for sure but I'd expect it to be an immense effort | 17:58:02 |
 WeetHet | In reply to @tomberek:matrix.org
Would the stdenv folks be interested in a relocatable store, a relocatable Nix? The SC is exploring this as a possible roadmap effort and a big part of it would be building some momentum with the core+stdenv that requires more specialized experience. Don't have all the details figured out, but trying to gauge the interest. Not an stdenv folk but if I understand correctly, this would allow moving the darwin store out of a separate partition which would certainly be nice | 18:02:22 |
 emily | I've explored the idea (not in code, just in my head) and I would like it but I agree with Alyssa that it would be super tough in a lot of ways – it's not just linker stuff but a bunch of ecosystems fractally expecting absolute paths to work, so I think it would involve substantial patching of many many packages | 18:03:14 |
| emily | (hopefully some of that could go upstream, but I know some projects are happy assuming absolute paths) | 18:03:31 |
| tomberek | It being a large effort is why we're trying to see if there is interest, what kind of funding would be needed, to do a feasibility analysis, etc. | 18:03:35 |
| emily | linker stuff is an issue too though: e.g., the path to the dynamic loader for Linux shared executables is absolute, and that's a kernel-level limitation. you can use $ORIGIN in library paths but not for the loader itself. I think you can work around it by linking binaries as effectively "static PIEs" with their own startup code that finds their dynamic loader and execs it | 18:04:37 |
| emily | but definitely pretty deep toolchain surgery to make that work, I've wanted to prototype it but no time | 18:04:53 |
