| 12 Jan 2026 |
 Gaétan Lepage | opencv4Full with cudaSupport looks problematic actually. | 15:49:06 |
 connor (he/him) | I didn't build for aarch64-linux (with or without CUDA) or for any darwin platforms, so I guess there's still that.
As a general concern with larger rebuilds around this size it's the "use your discretion" vs. "always target staging" divide. | 15:49:52 |
| connor (he/him) | How so? | 15:50:07 |
| Gaétan Lepage | Nevermind, it's already broken. Not a regression. | 15:50:46 |
| Gaétan Lepage | hexa (UTC+1) suggested that it could be merged into master.
I'll try to build it on the other platforms. | 15:52:23 |
 hexa | you can throw opencv on top of staging-next which started earlier | 15:53:09 |
| connor (he/him) | To clarify, can or should? | 15:53:42 |
| hexa | slight preference | 15:54:13 |
| hexa | because while these were 500-1000 builds they gravitated to the more annoying end of builds | 15:54:29 |
| Gaétan Lepage | Ok, I'll target staging-next once I'm done building for all platforms | 15:55:50 |
| connor (he/him) | Any thoughts on whether it’s suitable for backport to 25.11? Would unbreak CUDA 13 functionality there which I welcome | 17:09:22 |
| 13 Jan 2026 |
 Alexandros Liarokapis | what do I use as inputs and nixpkgs config to get cached ucc with cuda support? | 23:00:25 |
| Alexandros Liarokapis | what I did was use https://hydra.nixos-cuda.org/build/63411#tabs-buildinputs for nixpkgs input, then instantiate only with allowUnfree and cudaSupport = true; | 23:01:46 |
| Alexandros Liarokapis | nvm my user nix config was overriding my systems's cache | 23:13:26 |
| 14 Jan 2026 |
| connor (he/him) | I didn't realize that by making TensorRT 10.14.1 the default I effectively broke aarch64-linux (non Jetson) builds using TensorRT since NVIDIA didn't make a release for that platform for CUDA 12 -- it's CUDA 13 only.
So... do I roll back the version of TensorRT on aarch64-linux for CUDA 12.x or do something else? It'd need to get backported to the release branch to unbreak that.
10.13.0 has support for aarch64-linux for CUDA 12, but it was removed in 10.13.2 (there is no 10.13.1 release I can find). | 00:33:23 |
 yorik.sar | So they removed support for a whole version+platform in a patch release? That’s not nice. | 04:45:45 |
| yorik.sar | I think we’d need 2 versions then - one for aarch64, one for the rest. | 04:46:34 |
| hexa | it might be possible that I can escape the tensorflow curse with ai-edge-litert | 21:30:09 |
| hexa | * it might be possible that I can escape the tensorflow curse with ai-edge-litert, the successor to tflite | 21:30:15 |
| 15 Jan 2026 |
| connor (he/him) | Can someone do something to test or verify https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/480232 | 03:07:04 |
| hexa | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/480103 introduces reintroduces libtensorflow-bin at 2.18.1, if anyone cares for that | 15:15:31 |
| hexa | * https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/480103 introduces reintroduces libtensorflow-bin at 2.18.1, if anyone here cares for that | 15:15:35 |
| hexa |
Note: Publishing standalone libtensorflow packages was dropped in TensorFlow 2.19.0, so the binary version used in this package is the latest one.
| 15:16:07 |
| hexa | ah sure, that's why we package an outdated release 😬 | 15:16:18 |
| connor (he/him) | Goddamn stubs and transitive symbol resolution | 17:33:35 |
| * connor (he/him) grumbles | 17:33:39 |
| 4 Aug 2022 |
|  Winter (she/her) joined the room. | 03:26:42 |
| Winter (she/her) | (hi, just came here to read + respond to this.) | 03:28:52 |
 tpw_rules | hey. i had previously sympathzied with samuela and like i said before had some of the same frustrations. i just edited my github comment to add "[CUDA] packages are universally complicated, fragile to package, and critical to daily operations. Nix being able to manage them is unbelievably helpful to those of us who work with them regularly, even if support is downgraded to only having an expectation of function on stable branches." | 03:29:14 |
| Winter (she/her) | In reply to @tpw_rules:matrix.org
i'm mildly peeved about a recent merging of something i maintain where i'm pretty sure the merger does not own the expensive hardware required to properly test the package. i don't think it broke anything but i was given precisely 45 minutes to see the notification before somebody merged it ugh, 45 minutes? that's... not great. not to air dirty laundry but did you do what samuela did in the wandb PR and at least say that that wasn't a great thing to do? (not sure how else to word that, you get what i mean) | 03:30:23 |
