| 4 Jul 2026 |
 emily | we did update darwin.libcxx with the SDK update, so it might be that, there's some other fallout that looks like that | 13:39:20 |
| emily | but idk why it'd be happening | 13:39:25 |
| emily | shion:~
❭ fd cstddef result/
result/include/c++/v1/__cstddef/
result/include/c++/v1/__cxx03/cstddef
result/include/c++/v1/cstddef
| 13:39:55 |
 Grimmauld (any/all) | @hexadoes python3Packages.nanobind.tests work? It breaks in that include, not pikepdf itself. Which is why i am wondering whether the issue may lie with nanobind. We don't do checks on that by default. | 13:49:38 |
| emily | ok, so pikepdf got bumped | 13:51:04 |
| emily | and started to use clang-scan-deps | 13:51:14 |
| emily | so it's a pikepdf update, not a Darwin change, that broke it most likely | 13:51:27 |
| emily | looks like they switched build systems | 13:51:32 |
 hexa | quickly fetching half the ml world for nanobind tests 🫠 | 13:51:58 |
| emily | oh they didn't even use nanobind before | 13:52:48 |
| hexa | nanobind.tests works | 13:53:06 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | huh | 13:53:23 |
| hexa | cc dotlambda for pikepdf | 13:53:26 |
| emily | I don't think pikepdf know-how is gonna fix this | 13:53:43 |
| emily | it's still fundamentally compiler wrapper weirdness | 13:53:50 |
| emily | it sure seems like that clang-scan-deps call is not invoking the compiler wrapper at all | 13:54:11 |
| emily | despite passing the path to the compiler wrapper | 13:54:16 |
| emily | what even uses this thing? I remember us talking about pikepdf before | 13:54:40 |
| hexa | 👋 | 13:55:29 |
| emily | hahahahaha | 13:56:31 |
| emily | this is downstream of some C++ modules nonsense | 13:56:36 |
| emily | I think | 13:56:41 |
| emily | yeah, https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/514323 | 13:56:57 |
| emily | we need to merge clang-tools in really | 13:57:21 |
| hexa | stdenv 🎉 | 13:57:28 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | XD | 13:57:43 |
| Grimmauld (any/all) | reroll? | 13:57:46 |
| emily | it's fine, can work around it locally for now I think | 13:57:47 |
| emily | no | 13:57:50 |
| emily | it would really take something apocalyptic to be worth a reroll at this point | 13:58:05 |
