| 8 Jan 2026 |
 vcunat | nixpkgs-unstable is also blocked for a week now, because of some darwin-only issue, BTW. | 14:32:23 |
 hexa | twisted fails differently than on staging-next 🤔 restarting once more | 14:34:49 |
 Fabián Heredia | I only have x86_64-linux, can someone on one of the 3 affected platforms (aarch64-linux, aarch64-darwin, x86_64-darwin) review https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/478053 ? | 15:37:22 |
 Ben Sparks | not sure what there is to do here :/ nixpkgs-review states 0 rebuilds, as does the PR | 15:51:00 |
| Ben Sparks | * not sure what there is to do here? nixpkgs-review states 0 rebuilds, as does the PR | 15:51:07 |
| Ben Sparks | * not sure what there is to do here? nixpkgs-review states 0 rebuilds, as does the PR (posted from an aarch64-darwin machine) | 15:52:04 |
| Fabián Heredia | It is reapplying changes from a PR that was labeled 0 rebuilds but ended up being about 50k on hydra: https://matrix.to/#/!UNVBThoJtlIiVwiDjU:nixos.org/$CchYF6HrOphocWTwXpEGkBlcRn_Jm1EU9LG8YztjibU?via=nixos.org&via=matrix.org&via=tchncs.de | 15:52:19 |
 emily | did we figure out why the rebuilds weren't reported? | 16:08:36 |
| emily | oh | 16:09:03 |
| emily | it's just drift wrt the queue, ok | 16:09:12 |
| emily | as in it was comparing against old master | 16:09:18 |
| emily | Wolfgang had a WIP PR to fix that with the queue if anyone wants to take it up FWIW | 16:09:39 |
| emily | I forget what it was missing | 16:10:07 |
| emily | there's a bit of subtlety about what should count as drift and how to signal it | 16:10:18 |
| emily | seems like probably OS upgrade fallout? | 16:37:01 |
| emily | I don't really feel qualified to diagnose cursed Nix bugs, though… | 16:37:20 |
| emily | could perhaps just skip the tests. | 16:37:39 |
| emily | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/476794#issue-3778962273 lists shebang as failing, but it is not failing in the linked log. | 16:39:53 |
| emily | so at least one part of this is flakiness? | 16:39:57 |
| emily | ++(nix-shell.sh:63) nix-shell --pure -p foo bar --run 'echo "$(foo) $(bar)"'
these 2 derivations will be built:
/nix/var/nix/builds/nix-68111-2661222595/nix-test/main/nix-shell/store/pvbnf5qhij1hp7b6l5iyvsg54w1781pl-bar.drv
/nix/var/nix/builds/nix-68111-2661222595/nix-test/main/nix-shell/store/z8944igxbz7hsf1dgj5i0gijhb78ja3g-foo.drv
building '/nix/var/nix/builds/nix-68111-2661222595/nix-test/main/nix-shell/store/pvbnf5qhij1hp7b6l5iyvsg54w1781pl-bar.drv'...
building '/nix/var/nix/builds/nix-68111-2661222595/nix-test/main/nix-shell/store/z8944igxbz7hsf1dgj5i0gijhb78ja3g-foo.drv'...
/nix/var/nix/builds/nix-68111-2661222595/nix-shell-99938-0/rc: line 1: rm: command not found
+(nix-shell.sh:63) output=' '
+(nix-shell.sh:64) '[' ' ' = 'foo bar' ']'
| 16:40:52 |
| emily | it's a bit hard to diagnose without seeing what actually happened there. | 16:40:58 |
| emily | presumably https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/14778 isn't immediately relevant if the shebang test stopped failing on the most recent retry. | 16:41:31 |
| emily | the one that's still failing is main / nix-shell, which is not the ca / nix-shell that was previously failing | 16:41:44 |
| vcunat | Probably. And lix also fails. The reasons probably overlap.
https://hydra.nixos.org/build/318503096 | 16:41:51 |
| emily | so 0 overlap with the listed failures. so it's just very flaky? | 16:41:51 |
| emily | there's one test failing and it's not either of the two listed as failing in the issue report | 16:42:07 |
| emily | I mean, I can hit the restart button… | 16:42:49 |
| vcunat | Feel free. | 16:43:41 |
| vcunat | But the Nix build has been retried several times already. | 16:43:51 |
| vcunat | * But the Nix build has been retried several times already before reporting it. | 16:44:01 |
