| 24 Nov 2025 |
 SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | Go ahead and open a PR to nixos-homepage. If anyone should have objections they can voice them there, but I don't expect there to be any | 16:27:47 |
 yorik.sar | Is there some place where these points are expanded? Like what means “e.g. cudb” there, for example? | 16:40:12 |
| yorik.sar | Ok, will do! | 16:40:18 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | A scattering of PRs and issues on GitHub, but say are you free to join us tomorrow 21:15 CET (20:15 UTC)? We try to sync every Tuesdays by video | 16:55:55 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | * A scattering of PRs and issues on GitHub, but say are you free to join us tomorrow 21:15 CET (20:15 UTC)? We try to sync every Tuesday by video | 16:56:12 |
| yorik.sar | Sure, I could join. | 17:00:21 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) Gaétan Lepage doing same time as last week right? | 17:08:59 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | * connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) Gaétan Lepage doing same time as last week right? (sent an update, Connor yours seems to auto-reject) | 17:09:47 |
 connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Huh, I don’t even see anything in my junk mail :/ | 17:31:54 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Two thoughts:
- Helion backend for einops
- Optuna integration with Helion to allow for persistent studies (e.g., if the seed is fixed and the number of generations is increased, the optimization should resume from where it stopped rather than start an entirely new optimization)
| 17:34:43 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Serge I’m working on a matrix of behavior of propagating and consuming setup hooks through packages | 17:36:11 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | I think the key bit is that buildInputs already are (0, 0) away from the current derivation (because we're building for (0, 1)) | 17:59:02 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | But for the PR we should just drop the offset-checking logic from the hook imo | 18:00:16 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | * But for the PR we should just drop the offset-checking logic from the hook imo, and avoid propagating extra patchelf | 18:00:45 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Created this table by building everything in the scope I added and assembling the information from the logs (no build succeeds since I don't produce an out output): https://github.com/ConnorBaker/nix-propagation-behavior/blob/1afbd58f2af1468d4564722b7180cc4d89967ef3/README.md | 19:28:30 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Using the table, our "users" are packages consuming the stub outputs, which we would expect to happen from nativeBuildInputs or buildInputs (or both).
If used in nativeBuildInputs, we need to install the hook in propagated-host-host-deps (for (-1, -1)) or propagated-build-inputs (for (-1, 0)).
If used in buildInputs, we need to install the hook in propagated-build-build-deps (for (-1, -1)) or propagated-native-build-inputs (for (-1, 0)).
Since we're modifying binaries in-place through patchelf, the (-1, -1) offsets make more sense to me, but I can install to propagated-build-inputs and propagated-native-build-inputs instead for the (-1, 0) offsets. | 19:28:35 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | I think the "wonky" behavior I had seen previously (essentially the hook wasn't sourced when put in propagated-build-inputs or propagated-native-build-inputs) can be explained by the fact I was installing the hook during postInstall. Since the dependency files are replaced in fixupPhase, those entries were clobbered.
Now that I'm installing them in postFixup, it's not an issue. | 19:30:10 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/459416 has been updated, please consider merging it | 21:35:10 |
