sphalerite changed the topic of #nixos-dev to: NixOS Development (#nixos for questions) | NixOS 19.03 released! https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-19-03-release/2652 | https://hydra.nixos.org/jobset/nixos/trunk-combined https://channels.nix.gsc.io/graph.html https://r13y.com | 19.03 RMs: samueldr,sphalerite | https://logs.nix.samueldr.com/nixos-dev
niksnut has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
_ris has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
drakonis has joined #nixos-dev
ivan has quit [Quit: lp0 on fire]
harrow has quit [Quit: Leaving]
harrow has joined #nixos-dev
ivan has joined #nixos-dev
harrow has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
ivan_ has joined #nixos-dev
ivan has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
ivan_ is now known as ivan
harrow has joined #nixos-dev
das_j has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
das_j has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.4]
drakonis has joined #nixos-dev
davidtwco has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
zimbatm has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
dmj` has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
chrisaw has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
scott has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
chrisaw has joined #nixos-dev
davidtwco has joined #nixos-dev
zimbatm has joined #nixos-dev
scott has joined #nixos-dev
dmj` has joined #nixos-dev
tdeo has quit [Quit: Quit]
tdeo has joined #nixos-dev
tdeo has joined #nixos-dev
tdeo has quit [Changing host]
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
init_6 has joined #nixos-dev
init_6 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
init_6 has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
drakonis has joined #nixos-dev
init_6 has quit []
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
niksnut has joined #nixos-dev
johanot has joined #nixos-dev
ryantm has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
<Taneb> qtscript is broken in 19.09 due to https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-74196 I think, but I don't have the time to fix it right now. There's a fix mentioned in my link
<Taneb> This is one of the top "problematic dependencies" in https://gist.github.com/craigem/18e300d0424fa33b86e3fb5db792f80f
<Taneb> (is this the right place for this sort of thing?)
<manveru> probably :)
andi- has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.6]
andi- has joined #nixos-dev
andi- has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.6]
andi- has joined #nixos-dev
orivej has joined #nixos-dev
<ddima> FRidh: Hey. I think the recent bumps of numpy to 1.7.2 have broken scikit-learn, which break quite a bit of downstream python modules - this issue does not seem to be fixed upstream yet either: https://github.com/scikit-learn/scikit-learn/issues/14547
<{^_^}> scikit-learn/scikit-learn#14547 (by h6197627, 5 weeks ago, open): Scikit-learn 0.21.3 test_lda_predict test failure with Numpy 1.17.0
<ddima> I'm currently trying it out against the older version to verify, but if there are not too many issues caused by a rollback, one might consider that for 19.09
<FRidh> ddima: it's just a single test and a matter of tolerance it seems. In other words, that test needs tuning. We could disable that specific test until that's done.
<ddima> Id be a bit worried about numerical discrepancies though
<ddima> as in, as a distribution it might be best to not fiddle with such things with libraries that are very wide-spread for statistical applications, compared to a rollback. but thats just my first intuition.
<ddima> but I did not check yet what the numpy bumps included feature/bugfix wise, so thats a one-sided sentiment.
drakonis has joined #nixos-dev
<FRidh> yes, every version will have its bugs
<ddima> At least at first sight "Mismatch: 16.7%" does not shout "obviously harmless"
<FRidh> often with these types of tests the values are produced, then stored, and later tested against. If it was originally not entirely correct, you would always be testing against that
__monty__ has joined #nixos-dev
<ddima> yeah, I know, I've sadly have dealt quite a bunch with such tests - but its also a bit of a question of who should be able to make that call. I'll look around for a bit. Just wanted to give you a head up.
drakonis_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<FRidh> alright thanks
Jackneill has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Jackneill has joined #nixos-dev
Jackneill has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Jackneill has joined #nixos-dev
Jackneill has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Jackneill has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<worldofpeace> Taneb: if you don't have time to fix the issue right now, opening an issue for yourself and others would be a good idea.
<worldofpeace> that way duplicated efforts don't happen and you can gather the opinions of other people who could help with the issue.
evanjs- has quit [Quit: ZNC 1.7.4 - https://znc.in]
evanjs- has joined #nixos-dev
<Taneb> worldofpeace: I've got a bit of time now (lunch break) so I'm giving it a go
<worldofpeace> ✨ Taneb that's great
<Taneb> My fix seems to have worked, but I'm a little anxious that all the patches "nearby" are in-tree, when I'm using fetchpatch
<worldofpeace> typically fetching is preferred, unless the other nearby patches are from a similar source that's unreliable
<Taneb> I'm fetching from GitHub
<Taneb> Which should be more-or-less reliable, given how much nixpkgs does that for patches
<worldofpeace> it's pretty much ideal for committed patches
pie_ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<Taneb> PR created!
<FRidh> Just saw the GNU Mes 0.20 announcement. It says NixOS is an upcoming target. Is someone specifically going to work on that?
pie_ has joined #nixos-dev
johanot has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.4]
<niksnut> I did some work on it at the last reproducible builds meeting, but I don't know if anybody is currently working onit
FRidh has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
sphalerite changed the topic of #nixos-dev to: NixOS Development (#nixos for questions) | NixOS 19.09 now in beta! https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-19-09-feature-freeze/3707 | https://hydra.nixos.org/jobset/nixos/trunk-combined https://channels.nix.gsc.io/graph.html | https://r13y.com | 19.09 RMs: disasm, sphalerite | https://logs.nix.samueldr.com/nixos-dev
alyx has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
drakonis has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
drakonis1 has joined #nixos-dev
FRidh has joined #nixos-dev
<FRidh> ok so its not like someone got funded to work on that
<worldofpeace> srhb: you reproduced that issue in a minimal vm environment right?
pie__ has joined #nixos-dev
pie_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
pie__ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
pie_ has joined #nixos-dev
justanotheruser has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
<Mic92> FRidh: do you see any real-world advantages of having such a system? I feel like my paranoia level is not high enough to spend time on such a project.
<qyliss> I might well look into Mes as part of my work.
<qyliss> My paranoia level is definitely high enough.
das_j has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
das_j has joined #nixos-dev
das_j has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
das_j has joined #nixos-dev
<jtojnar> could someone transfer https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/68493 into nixos-homepage?
<{^_^}> #68493 (by volth, 3 hours ago, open): [repology] 'pname' is not exported to https://nixos.org/nixpkgs/packages-unstable.json.gz
ixxie has joined #nixos-dev
<jtojnar> thanks Eelco
jtojnar has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
jtojnar has joined #nixos-dev
__monty_1 has joined #nixos-dev
__monty_2 has joined #nixos-dev
<rycee> Anybody know how to get a a custom branch build on Hydra? Would like to have a build of https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/67942 to do some tests. It's a bit too heavy for my laptop since it includes an stdenv change…
<{^_^}> #67942 (by rycee, 1 week ago, open): WIP Support socket activated session dbus
__monty_1 has quit [Client Quit]
__monty_2 has quit [Client Quit]
<infinisil> rycee: Somebody with the necessary permissions needs to do that
<Mic92> rycee: domenkozar[m] for example can do that.
drakonis1 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<Mic92> rycee: do you think a custom branch is required for this one?
<rycee> Not sure. I'm reasonably confident in the change since I've tried adding the build hook directly to some strategically chosen packages without any issues.
<Mic92> rycee: I would also say this could go to staging as is.
<infinisil> Yeah same
<rycee> So for my purposes I would be happy to have it merged into staging and then doing the tests against a staging build.
<infinisil> We do have staging for such changes after all
<Mic92> rycee: you would want a custom branch if you for example upgrade gcc...
<infinisil> Ah you want to do testing with it, right
<rycee> infinisil: Yeah, I'd like to set up a whole system that used the new hook and verify that all user systemd services still work OK.
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-dev
<Mic92> rycee: if you just want to build your desktop with it, zimbatm maybe could give you builder access to the nix-community machine...
drakonis has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
FRidh2 has joined #nixos-dev
ryantm has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis has joined #nixos-dev
niksnut_ has joined #nixos-dev
niksnut_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
drakonis has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
drakonis_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
pie_ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<adisbladis> Mic92: rycee: I can do that
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-dev
pie_ has joined #nixos-dev
ivan has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
harrow has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
ivan has joined #nixos-dev
harrow has joined #nixos-dev
_ris has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis has joined #nixos-dev
<drakonis> isn't that the posix standard code in the ieee database?
<drakonis> oh wait, it says on your comment
FRidh2 has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
<worldofpeace> jtojnar: i.e the growing group of people who don't pay attention to posix anymore :P
<jtojnar> I know the number but I would not immediately connect it to POSIX myself
<jtojnar> fortunately, not many people need to target POSIX directly these days
<drakonis> the only folks that care about posix are folks that are not inside the big OS trio
ixxie has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<worldofpeace> jtojnar: I don't think https://nixos.org/nixpkgs/manual/#sec-package-naming instructs to put `unstable` as part of version. it explains it as 'append "unstable" to the name'
<worldofpeace> Package Naming doesn't have pname documented
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: yeah that is what I meant
<jtojnar> it should be inside pname
<worldofpeace> Also, I'm not sure if I really like this rule with using unstable in the name. It seems extra, the date should be enough.
<jtojnar> but I often put it in version, even though I was aware of the docs
<worldofpeace> right, I've been doing that because I think pname should always be the upstream package name
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: some software uses date for versioning (e.g osinfo-db)
<jtojnar> and I think there is value in knowing the package does not reflect upstream releases, at first glance
<worldofpeace> jtojnar: so we have to convey that it's not actually a release, right.
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: here is my interpretation of the attributes https://github.com/repology/repology/issues/854#issuecomment-530515318
<worldofpeace> jtojnar: that makes me think that unstable should be part of version then. as it conveys a separate versioning from schemes that use dates as versions. and pname should be the upstream software name?
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: if pname = package name, we could have foo & foo-unstable. That is how I interpret the manual, unstable as a separate package
Cale has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<jtojnar> If we defined pname = project name, then I would agree, but a package manager might not care about project name as much (consider source splitting)
<worldofpeace> jtojnar: I do recall at some point someone stating that as the reasoning behind that rule. but sometimes the same package gets upgraded to an unstable version, is foo-unstable now completely different from foo and how will others interpret that? I'd say it's just the same package at a different version, the actual attrubute for the package would be the means to separate it.
<jtojnar> actually, source splitting is a point we should consider
<worldofpeace> define source splitting?
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: great point
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: like gentoo does with gst plugins
<worldofpeace> jtojnar: ah now I know what you mean.
<worldofpeace> all of this becomes hard to explain to other people when nix doesn't have a internal abstraction of a package :D
<jtojnar> yeah
<jtojnar> could we use attribute names for repology?
<jtojnar> that would allow us to sidestep this discussion completely
<worldofpeace> I'm not sure. I don't think any attribute in all-packages.nix can begin with a number, but I guess they could filter that
<worldofpeace> I think it's possible pname and version can be blessed attributes that are expected to be exposed, and name just becomes an internal thing like you've said
Cale has joined #nixos-dev
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: the main issue with where to place unstable probably comes from the fact that we use it for two different things
<jtojnar> a) unstable variants of packages
<jtojnar> b) main package but unstable version
<jtojnar> and Nix makes it hard to tell which is which since it does not know any blessed attributes other than name
<worldofpeace> jtojnar: right, we should mix two distinct concepts like this
<worldofpeace> * shouldn't
<worldofpeace> hmm, parseDrvName will actually never consider unstable as part of the version
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: yup, that's the whole reason I opened the issue in the first place
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: the only way to fix this is to let nix-env use pname instead of Nix's parseDrvName equivalent
<worldofpeace> jtojnar: i.e pname rfc 2.0 :D
<jtojnar> but I would rather drop name support from nix-env altogether
<jtojnar> attrpath master race
<worldofpeace> The attr paths are rarely confusing, +1 for them I guess
<jtojnar> worldofpeace: also another idea: do not list variants in all-packages.nix but expose them through passthru.variants
<jtojnar> would probably require hydra patch, though
* emily would prefer only having "unstable" in separate variant packages that are actually expected to be less stable than some stable version
<emily> I don't think it makes sense to use version = "unstable-YYYY-MM-DD" for stuff whose "main upstream" is a git repo
drakonis has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
<worldofpeace> jtojnar: in general having a nice way to expose different build variants would be nice, currently it's just another package
<worldofpeace> emily: I think in the context of the manual unstable means not a stable release
drakonis has joined #nixos-dev
drakonis_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
drakonis has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
drakonis has joined #nixos-dev
__monty__ has quit [Quit: leaving]
justanotheruser has joined #nixos-dev
layus has quit [Quit: ZNC 1.7.3 - https://znc.in]
layus has joined #nixos-dev
niksnut has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
niksnut has joined #nixos-dev
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]