Synthetica has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
lopsided98 has quit [Quit: Disconnected]
lopsided98 has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
pie__ has joined #nixos-dev
pie___ has joined #nixos-dev
pie__ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
jtojnar has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
pie___ has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<ekleog>
thank you all for having looked into this!
lassulus_ has joined #nixos-dev
lassulus has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
lassulus_ is now known as lassulus
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
worldofpeace has quit [Quit: worldofpeace]
xeji has joined #nixos-dev
xeji has quit [Client Quit]
xeji has joined #nixos-dev
xeji has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.3]
xeji has joined #nixos-dev
xeji has quit [Client Quit]
jtojnar has joined #nixos-dev
Jackneill has joined #nixos-dev
MichaelRaskin has quit [Quit: MichaelRaskin]
Synthetica has joined #nixos-dev
orivej has joined #nixos-dev
Cale has joined #nixos-dev
init_6 has joined #nixos-dev
xeji has joined #nixos-dev
xeji has quit [Client Quit]
<domenkozar>
is there anyone that is interested to guide us through GSOC2019? :)
genesis has joined #nixos-dev
lokado has joined #nixos-dev
xeji has joined #nixos-dev
pie___ has joined #nixos-dev
layus has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
layus has joined #nixos-dev
init_6 has quit []
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
pie___ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<LnL>
hmm the installer doesn't create a 'default' profile anymore?
Jackneill has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
orivej has joined #nixos-dev
lokado has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.3]
pie__ has joined #nixos-dev
<aristid>
samueldr: you're samuel dionne-riel?
<aristid>
samueldr: i was extremely surprised to see nixos use a non-long-term kernel, and it seems you made the change. i don't really mind, but the fact that the commit message doesn't explain why such a huge change was made does bother me.
<aristid>
on kernel.org, 4.19 is only called "stable", not "longterm". is it really long-term anyways?
<samueldr>
though I think there was a separate announcement for when it was designated as LTS
<domenkozar>
which was before release :)
<domenkozar>
we used to switch to LTS after a few bugfixes
<domenkozar>
I think waiting on another minor kernel is a good idea for all kernel modules to catch up
<domenkozar>
as we did this time.
<samueldr>
yeah, I was pleasantly surprised to see no breakage, once the two failing modules were updated
<samueldr>
(nixos tests failures excluded :/)
<samueldr>
oh! channel updated, finally :)
<domenkozar>
it did?
<samueldr>
nixos-unstable apparently did, according to howoldis, not nixpkgs-unstable
<domenkozar>
yeah pandoc failed since haskell pkgs got bumped
<domenkozar>
but it was fixed so soon
<samueldr>
(I'll ask again next year as there's lack of activity) I think the nixos:unstable-aarch64 jobset is good to be disabled; its check interval is already disabled anyway, and it's tracking another older branch rather than master... unless there's still some use for it?
<domenkozar>
hmm that gets me thinking
<domenkozar>
we split up nixpkgs into different channels per platform
<domenkozar>
maybe same should be done for nixos?
<domenkozar>
anyway I've disabled it to reflect current reality
<samueldr>
domenkozar: graham was thinking about removing that distinction
<samueldr>
and in fact, other than 18.09-aarch64, of which there won't be an equivalent for 19.03, the only split is with darwin, right?
<domenkozar>
yeah
<domenkozar>
so I did the whole darwin split because people complained that they don't want linux channel to hang if there's no darwin maintainer available
<domenkozar>
which makes sense also for aarch, since one needs different hardware
<samueldr>
imho, one major distinction, but not enough by itself, that aarch64 is less problematic than darwin in this regard, is that there's no licensing issue; you can (even though it's going to be a pain) run aarch64 emulated legally
<samueldr>
and then, a big chunk of the compatibility and test results will go in pair with x86_64; when we ran aarch64 as supported, the only tests that failed were the predictable names, and AFAIUI it's because the (virtualised) hardware differs, thus the names differ