<Arahael>
I've just installed enlightenment (and wow, it's beautiful!) However, it's not appearing in the login options.
<Arahael>
I think I need to set some sort of "desktopManager" setting in the nix configuration.nix thing, however, how do I find out what expression to put into that?
<Arahael>
Figured it out: The issue I had was that whilst I did have the desktopManager correctly set in the configuration.nix file, it turns out I didn't quite restart sddm.
drakonis1 has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.2]
<elvishjerricco>
OVMF wasn't loading the efifs drivers for some reason. So I updated it and yay it worked! For all but the one specific fs that I needed...
jasongrossman has quit [Quit: ERC (IRC client for Emacs 26.1)]
jasongrossman has joined #nixos-chat
<sphalerite>
Arahael: yes it's very shiny, I tried it out the other day too :D
<sphalerite>
infinisil: finally doing my znapzend to the external USB HD as well now :)
<sphalerite>
previously I was only snapshotting but now I'm actually backing up my work laptop
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: \o/
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: You know ZFS is unreliable over USB, right? Just so long as you're prewarned.
<sphalerite>
jasongrossman: details?
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: I haven't seen the details documented, not in detail, if you know what I mean, but what I've been told is that ZFS, more than other programs, believes what the USB bus tells it about the state of the disk, and uses that information to know when it's finished an atomic commit. Only the USB protocol allows disk controllers to lie about it. And when ZFS is wrong about the state of your disk, and eventually finds out it's
<jasongrossman>
wrong, it's likely to mark your disk as unwriteable. It's happened to me.
<sphalerite>
ah, I see
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Maybe that's acceptable as long as it only happens rarely and it's a disk you're only using for backups.
* sphalerite
bumps priority of NAS on the shopping list :)
<sphalerite>
yes I am only using it for backups
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Yeah. USB is a really naughty protocol.
<sphalerite>
jasongrossman++
<{^_^}>
jasongrossman's karma got increased to 6
<sphalerite>
thanks for the heads up :)
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Thank you. ...
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: I expect the problem's reduced if you leave your drive plugged in for ages after ZFS thinks disk activity has finished.
<sphalerite>
I think exporting the pool and `eject`ing the disk afterwards will also do?
<sphalerite>
s/think/hope/
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Ah yes. Good point. I have found that's fixed problems sometimes. (Sometimes I had to export and import several times in a row to fix problems.)
<sphalerite>
oh, I always export before disconnecting
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: I don't think ejecting is relevant, just exporting and re-importing.
<sphalerite>
also because I share the disk between several computers
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Yes, good, but you may ALSO need to wait ages after finishing backing up before exporting, and you may need to RE-export and re-import later if ZFS reports problems.
<sphalerite>
:/
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: And scrub, of course.
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Do get a NAS if you can afford it, or a different bus ... I use FireWire because I'm oldskool!
<sphalerite>
yeah started a slightly overdue scrub 15min ago
<jasongrossman>
Great.
<sphalerite>
different bus could be difficult with this laptop
<jasongrossman>
Yeah. I've found it a big constraint on buying laptops. :-/
<sphalerite>
well modern high-end stuff mostly has thunderbolt I guess?
<sphalerite>
But yeah if you're sticking to FireWire…
<jasongrossman>
Yes. Or, as you said, get a NAS.
<sphalerite>
yeah NAS is better I'd say :)
<sphalerite>
I'd also feel more comfortable if I had some mirroring going on.
<jasongrossman>
:-)
<sphalerite>
also SSD for speeeeeeeeed
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: For backups?!
<sphalerite>
well it might be useful for other stuff
<sphalerite>
I mean an SSD for cache and slog, not an all-SSD pool
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: I have external SSDs, acquired by accident, and I can't say I find them much use. In contrast to my internal SSD, which is a godsend.
<sphalerite>
yeah I suppose the main advantage over external HDDs will be that they're somewhat more likely to survive getting dropped.
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Good point.
<sphalerite>
also lighter? Possibly?
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Yes. Does that matter?!
<sphalerite>
it can :)
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Well you're right. An SSD is maybe a quarter of the weight of a hard drive. Could save you several whole grams.
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: You'll definitely notice the difference, assuming you're keeping them in a carbon fibre case.
<sphalerite>
I'd much rather carry 100TB worth of SSDs in my rucksack than 100TB worth of HDDs :D
<sphalerite>
anyway.
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: :-)
<sphalerite>
(because that's a likely situation)
<sphalerite>
yeah I want a NAS
<sphalerite>
I wonder if I could take my external HDD out of its case and connect it through a better thing.
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Sure. (Actually a few HDDs have weird proprietary connectors, but that's rare.) The main problem is that the "better thing", if it's not USB, will be a bit expensive.
<sphalerite>
not necessarily in a way that preserves its externalness :p
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: I would happily smash open an external drive and expect it to have a standard SATA connector. If in doubt, there's a reddit group you can ask.
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: I see, yes.
<sphalerite>
but I more or less plan to retire it with the acquisition of a NAS, and if I'm going to do that I'd rather copy all my data off it *before* risking its destruction
<sphalerite>
and after copying all the data off it, well, there's no more point in trying to connect it internally.
<sphalerite>
Would you happen to have any recommendations NAS-wise?
<sphalerite>
considering FreeNAS, but they seem to be pretty expensive.
<sphalerite>
the FreeNAS Mini boxes that is
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: Right. I used to install my own OS on a cheap computer to get a NAS, which was a hassle ... but that was before I discovered NixOS. Now it should be easy.
<sphalerite>
well I'd be installing nixos on the freenas mini :)
<jasongrossman>
sphalerite: I would get something like an HP miniserver, if you want something quiet that's all-in-one, or you could get one of those tiny NUCs or something if you don't mind having separate boxes for the disks.
<jasongrossman>
I see, yes.
<sphalerite>
eeeh separate boxes doesn't seem like fun
<sphalerite>
HP miniserver, noted
<jasongrossman>
There's a reddit group for this. Not sure I can remember its name though. I do remember that HP stuff is cheap and is thought to work OK.
<jasongrossman>
Of course you have to think about connection to the NAS. I used to use ethernet.
<sphalerite>
yeah good ol' gigabit ethernet is good enough for me.
<jasongrossman>
Great. ... Do not do what I did and get a 2006 Mac Pro, because they have 32-bit BIOS :-/
<jasongrossman>
Actually I spoke too soon. NixOS should be fine with a 32-bit bios. So maybe do do that.
<sphalerite>
Maybe something with PCI slots where I could stick a 10Gbit card should I ever need it would be nice, but I do think there's such a thing as looking too far ahead.
<jasongrossman>
Right, do not look too far ahead!
<sphalerite>
well my dad's old mac pro gave up the ghost about a year or two ago
<sphalerite>
we were already using it as a server (with ubuntu on it, ewwwww)
<sphalerite>
now there's a new motherboard and CPU in it, which took some pretty aggressive modifications to the case x)
<sphalerite>
so the only apple bit that's left really is the branding on the case.
<sphalerite>
oh yeah the "HPE ProLiant MicroServer Gen10" looks nice
<jasongrossman>
Interesting!
<sphalerite>
wow if fujitsu's servers are as bad as their website…
<sphalerite>
I didn't know SPARC was still a thing
<jasongrossman>
Me neither.
<sphalerite>
nixos sparc port anyone?
<jasongrossman>
I used to have a DEC minicomputer faceplate, and it's one of the few things I regret ever throwing away.
<sphalerite>
haha wow
<jasongrossman>
I still have part of Titan II, a computer from 1964. The computer that ran the first ever operating system ... well, arguably. Actually several computers can claim that, depending on definitions of "operating system".
<samueldr>
I was thinking about how `rm` is a (loadable?) builtin
<samueldr>
(meanwhile, macOS still ships a vintage bash)
<infinisil>
Huh I see
<infinisil>
No idea what that means
<infinisil>
I guess it's a builtin you can add but it's not there by default?
<infinisil>
So you don't neeed a rm binary somewhere
<samueldr>
ah, when using `rm` on the cli, instead of using the rm binary, bash will handle rm
<infinisil>
Yea
<infinisil>
A lot of common operations are builtins
<samueldr>
sure, but accreting more and more is (imho) not necessarily for the best in that case
<samueldr>
bash isn't busybox :/
<samueldr>
coreutils can be updated independently from bash
<infinisil>
That's a good point
<samueldr>
but, in another way, it's not a bad thing since it allows scripts targetting bash 5 to know which `rm` features are available
<infinisil>
That's also a good point
<samueldr>
and finally, in a weird twisted way, `sudo rm` now won't act like `rm`
<infinisil>
It'll only take 20 years for macOS to have bash 5 too
<samueldr>
it won't, licensing reasons
<infinisil>
Huh
<infinisil>
How?
<samueldr>
it's for a "legit" (but wrong imho) reason that many GNU tools are stuck as vintage on macOS
<samueldr>
GPLv3
<infinisil>
Man, this sucks
<samueldr>
apple didn't update anything to a revision under GPLv3, probably due to the anti-tivoization clause :/
<samueldr>
which suck greatly
<samueldr>
(the fact they don'T update sucks, not the clause)
<samueldr>
and it's kinda insulting how apple doesn't update the posix subsystem, they should just scrap everything that's vintage and use other more up-to-date posix and unix compliant tools rather than the vintage gnu things :(
<infinisil>
And there's security implications too I assume
<samueldr>
AFAIK they handle security patches themselves
<samueldr>
the source still is available under the GPLv2 license for their forks
<infinisil>
What version of bash does their latest release use?
<drakonis1>
samueldr: its freebsd right there
<drakonis1>
the horror
<samueldr>
I don't follow, what do you mean?
<drakonis1>
the non mach bits are freebsd bits
<drakonis1>
sometimes netbsd
<drakonis1>
the lack of updating seems to be that apple doesn't really care about it
<drakonis1>
osx isn't their huge moneymaker anymore
<drakonis1>
the kernel bits i mean
<drakonis1>
the userland is mostly GNU and some BSD tacked on
drakonis1 is now known as drakonis
<drakonis>
so, what's going to happen to osx support as newer versions of existing software slowly come out while osx remains stagnant?
sir_guy_carleton has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.2]
<samueldr>
nothing changes, it all depends on the software, when using core POSIX and UNIX standards it should stay compatible, after all it is UNIX compliant
<samueldr>
when using new APIs, well, macOS still has new APIs, so nothing changes there, software wanting to be macOS compatible implement things so it's compatible
<samueldr>
AFAIK, as far as nixpkgs is concerned, almost nothing from macOS' *userland* is used, so it doesn't really affect nixpkgs
<infinisil>
samueldr: That really makes nix possibly the best package manager on mac
<samueldr>
imho it does :)
<infinisil>
Assuming the stuff builds, and the boostrap works
<samueldr>
allows userland-dependent projects to not care as much about the stale userland
pie_ has joined #nixos-chat
<drakonis>
wouldn't it be optimal to have a nix spec and then have an implementation unique to mac osx?
pie_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
pie_ has joined #nixos-chat
<__monty__>
Uhm, afaik brew installs more recent GNU releases too?
<andi->
I am hunting a memory leak in an almost vanially nixos 18.09 since a few weeks now… Whenever I have the system running for a few hours it starts leaking memory. Neither slabtop nur the kmemleak checks reveal anything useful. I've been starting to disable system service. Once it started leaking <after> the nixos-upgrade.service ran in the morning... Not sure why that would be the case :/ Anyone else
<andi->
seeing something similar?
<joepie91>
andi-: any chance this is a case of "total used memory is far higher than the accumulated RSS of all processes can account for"?
<joepie91>
(and I mean actual used, not cache)
<andi->
yes
<andi->
A friend of mine has the same on a debian box.. everything from 4.14 to 4.19 seems to have that :/
<joepie91>
andi-: I've been noticing this for a while now, also on 18.03, though in my case it was usually after running for a number of days
<joepie91>
I regularly kill my firefox child processes because they get a bit RAM-hungry, and after a few days I usually notice that 4-6 of my 24GB of RAM are unaccounted for
<joepie91>
and are still consumed despite no RAM-hungry procs being running anymore
<joepie91>
(at which point I usually do a full reboot)
<andi->
mhmm
<andi->
this is scary
<andi->
I haven't seen that on any of the other hosts that are more busy. It is a bit annoying since that machine just has 2GB of RAM and is my XMPP server with disk ecnryption.. having to reboot every 3 days is not optimal :D
<MichaelRaskin>
Well, I have a script that sometimes leaks Firefox instances. When I have a memory leak, it is measured not in megabytes, but in Firefoxes.
<MichaelRaskin>
On the other hand, GCing the foxes does return me back to a fixed amount of RAM used…
<infinisil>
Related: My firefox recently always freezes when I change monitors, really weird, I always have to go into htop and SIGINT firefox-wrapper to make it quit
<andi->
haven't had that yet...
__monty__ has quit [Quit: leaving]
pie_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
pie__ has joined #nixos-chat
<MichaelRaskin>
I think I also move FF across monitors fine
<joepie91>
MichaelRaskin: Firefoxes... Firefocii?
<joepie91>
:P
pie__ has quit [Excess Flood]
pie__ has joined #nixos-chat
jackdk has joined #nixos-chat
<elvishjerricco>
Well, it looks like EfiFs can only be built on windows :/
<MichaelRaskin>
joepie91: I am not sure where this fashion to invent plurals comes from; fox-foxes.