<    March 2017    >
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa  
          1  2  3  4  
 5  6  7  8  9 10 11  
12 13 14 15 16 17 18  
19 20 21 22 23 _2_4 25  
26 27 28 29 30 31
01:06 LouisA joined
01:57 <pickfire> yGweSm1OzVHe: Yes, they can. But here on alpine they can't.
01:59 blueness joined
02:20 mikeee_ joined
02:27 tmh1999 joined
02:34 LouisA joined
02:42 Emperor_Earth joined
03:43 mikeee_ joined
04:34 blueness joined
04:58 blueness joined
05:00 mitchty joined
05:03 mikeee_ joined
06:03 fabled joined
07:01 <tmh1999> fabled : I just sent another kernel config for s390x, if you have any complain I am here :)
07:01 <tmh1999> v1 was pretty bloat ...
07:05 <fabled> tmh1999, ok... i was planning to do diff against x86_64 config and try to make the generic options the same; there was some differences mostly 'y' vs 'm'
07:08 <tmh1999> thanks
07:08 <tmh1999> take care when it comes to s390x-specific
07:10 <fabled> yeah, many of the differences are valid. it was not too many differences, so i might just go ahead and apply it
07:12 <tmh1999> I have cross-checked from Alpine, SUSE Fedora and Ubuntu
07:12 <tmh1999> guess that's my best
07:18 <tmh1999> fabled : is there any command/options in abuild/apk-tools to remove old packages in local repo, after pulling new aports & building ?
07:18 <fabled> ok.thanks a lot! i'll try to get it checked today. if there's only minor differences, do you prefer me to push with changes, or check with you the differences first?
07:18 <fabled> tmh1999, abuild cleanoldpkg ?
07:22 <tmh1999> fabled : awesome !
07:23 <tmh1999> never came across this option ../
07:23 <tmh1999> fabled : it's no hurry on the kernel config.
07:24 <tmh1999> you do whichever way fit your way and schedule
07:41 vakartel joined
07:47 fekepp joined
07:55 czart__ joined
08:07 <clandmeter> heh, leo-unglaub assumes he can rebuild world in 3 hours with his new AMD processor. I wonder after how many days he will just give up :)
08:14 t0mmy joined
08:27 royger joined
08:46 stwa joined
09:10 <TemptorSent> fabled: Good evening! Take a look at the latest couple entries at http://termbin.com/pqrb for an example of how the features allow flexible configuration and simplify the profiles.
09:57 stwa joined
10:23 stwa joined
11:29 blueness joined
11:38 vakartel joined
12:09 blueness joined
12:18 <yGweSm1OzVHe> you people are cordially invited to our hackercamp in hungary: https://camp.hsbp.org
12:24 fekepp joined
12:30 blueness joined
12:48 slukin joined
12:53 farosas joined
13:02 leitao joined
13:03 leitao joined
13:34 leitao joined
13:53 LongyanG joined
14:15 t0mmy joined
14:44 doppo joined
15:00 doppo joined
16:17 mikeee_ joined
16:43 stwa joined
16:57 stwa joined
17:16 tmh1999 joined
17:52 mikeee_ joined
17:54 <mitchty> out of curiosity, is there anything akin to nixos hydra to let you self host packages you create?
17:54 <mitchty> or rather do a build then host out the build apks
17:55 <mitchty> or should i just hack some CI stuff around doing that on my own?
17:59 LouisA joined
18:00 <jirutka> mitchty: no, but it’s not so hard to make your own https://github.com/jirutka/user-aports#how-to-use
18:00 <jirutka> eh, this https://github.com/jirutka/user-aports#how-to-setup-your-own-repository
18:00 <mitchty> cool i'll have a look
18:02 <jirutka> that reminds me that i should ask fabled if/how it can be simplified, I mean mainly to avoid using SSHFS
18:03 <mitchty> i'm asking mostly as i'm testing getting generated apkbuilds for haskell stuff working, and well, there is enough crazy in that to warrant the effort
18:06 <mitchty> and on that note, for haskell packages would it be OK to require that every haskell compiled port has to ensure that it builds/doesn't interfere version wise with any other shared package?
18:06 <mitchty> because needless to say, you can end up with package a requiring version b of some package, and package c requiring version b'
18:07 <mitchty> note, thats only for building really
18:09 <jirutka> Haskell doesn’t use shared libs, right?
18:09 <mitchty> it can, but not by default
18:09 <mitchty> the default is to statically link in haskell packages, dynamic link stuff like c libraries
18:10 <jirutka> so when you install A that depends on B, C, …, Z, then B, C, …, Z are build into the output binary, there are not standalone at fs?
18:10 <mitchty> correct
18:10 <jirutka> so the same as in Rust
18:10 <mitchty> well its actually "worse", you can technically have both versions in the same binary, but thats getting into some stuff that isn't relevant to packaging :)
18:10 <jirutka> then I’d not create pkg for every dependency and just download them in the abuild A
18:11 <jirutka> otherwise it’d be total insanity with no benefits at all
18:11 <mitchty> so i was starting down the road of using the arch tool that generates pkgbuilds for dependencies
18:12 <mitchty> that way instead of rebuilding dependencies in each package you'd only need to build it once in general
18:12 <mitchty> but suppose I should ask how we'd want to do it
18:12 <mitchty> have to map how cabal does dependency resolution to what apk has, or avoid it entirely
18:13 <jirutka> I’m thinking about adding support for third-party deps into abuild; e.g. cargo:rotor-1.2.3, this would be basically just a shortcut for defining full source URL of rotor in sources
18:14 <jirutka> b/c it doesn’t make any sense to create pkg for every dependency and replicate all the work that cargo/cabal/… do, dealing with conflicting versions etc.
18:14 <mitchty> i'd need to think about that a bit, but it would probably be similar to rust in that regard, as long as it bridges it should be ok
18:15 <jirutka> when such dependencies do not end up on filesystem separately
18:15 <jirutka> these are just build dependencies
18:15 <mitchty> well, in haskell its going to get even more ML..y in the next release where modules are generic
18:16 <mitchty> and you can have module A be honored by package B, but only for Integers, and then module C be honored by package D for ByteStrings
18:16 <jirutka> heh
18:16 <mitchty> https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Backpack
18:16 <mitchty> http://blog.ezyang.com/2016/10/try-backpack-ghc-backpack/ is a better intro though
18:17 <mitchty> anyway that works if we don't want to clutter up abuild with a ton of haskell-* packages
18:18 <mitchty> i was just thinking of improving the build time of some things with some shared packages
18:18 <mitchty> its really noticeable on arm as an example
18:18 blueness joined
18:19 <jirutka> yeah, I imagine that you can combine both approaches – make abuild for haskell dependency when it makes sense
18:20 <jirutka> hm, maybe it’d be better to add this shortcut to source, not to makedepends
18:21 <jirutka> that’d be closer to what it really do and also less controversial
18:21 <mitchty> well would it be possible to punt to say cabal/cargo and then cache the build?
18:21 <jirutka> what do you mean?
18:22 <mitchty> well say some package requires A B C as dependencies, but only for build
18:22 <mitchty> then package foo requires A B and say D for building
18:22 <mitchty> you can build A B C as if they were virtual packages, and have a way to cache their inputs as an apk you can makedepends on
18:23 <mitchty> that way package foo could reuse the build of A and B if possible
18:23 <mitchty> hopefully i explained that well enough
18:23 <jirutka> something like ccache…? ;)
18:23 <mitchty> pretty much, only that works with not C >.<
18:24 <mitchty> we could cheat by storing some of this in a common location for cabal/ghc
18:25 <jirutka> not sure if it’s a good idea…
18:25 <mitchty> well for cabal its not a big deal, we could use the new-build stuff which has nix style dependency tracking
18:26 <mitchty> aka if you build a package with ffi for example, and need it without for another, both can coexist at once
18:26 <mitchty> if ffi's version changes also no big deal
18:27 <mitchty> anyway, cabal/ghc is a bit flexible
18:27 <jirutka> we’ve already discussed this, leaving FHS, there are few ppl including me who wants to try it
18:27 <jirutka> it’d solve many problems
18:27 <mitchty> nix is really fun though, but in this regard its more build inputs
18:28 <skarnet> who do we have to kidnap and waterboard until they say yes to ditching FHS?
18:29 <jirutka> I’d prefer just to talk…
18:29 <skarnet> I can provide a bathtub. (My budget goes to computer stuff, my torture tools are amateur.)
18:29 <jirutka> 1th we must agree on it, 2nd someone must modify/develop tooling
18:30 <skarnet> you're always ruining all the fun
18:30 <mitchty> /usr/bin/env and /bin/sh is the only FHS stuff in nixos iirc, its not a whole lot
18:31 <skarnet> those make sense
18:31 <mitchty> in either case for build inputs let me try doing a few tests with compiling all build inputs into say /var/tmp/ghc-cache and see what happens
18:40 BitL0G1c joined
18:59 s33se joined
20:22 fekepp joined
21:02 blueness joined
21:57 laskin joined
21:59 <laskin> Hello. I'm trying to make packages for https://wireguard.io VPN. It consist of userland tools and kernel module. So, I wonder if there is a tutorial on packaging kernel modules for Alpine somewhere?
22:01 <laskin> IIUC, Alpine doesn't use dkms to build modules. So I guess, I should package binary module for current kernel in edge. Is it correct?
22:01 KrnlP7nc joined
22:03 KrnlP7nc left
22:06 <tmh1999> fabled : when "$CBUILD" != "$CTARGET", we have pkgname="go-bootstrap" instead of go, so why do we provide go-bootstrap=$pkgver-r$pkgrel at the same time ?
22:06 <tmh1999> that means, we will have go-bootstrap-$pkgver-r$pkgrel, and go-bootstrap=$pkgver-r$pkgrel
22:06 <tmh1999> care the - and =
22:16 <tmh1999> Right, I remove the first provides="...", then it works
22:17 <tmh1999> I will send a patch
22:29 blueness joined
22:46 TemptorSent joined
23:22 <BitL0G1c> linux-vanilla in edge is behind 3.5 branch https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/packages?name=linux-vanilla&branch=&repo=&arch=&maintainer=
23:28 laj joined
23:32 <jirutka> fabled: there’s something wrong, abuild does not detect dynamically linked libs for lua pkgs anymore
23:47 <jirutka> hm, this didn’t work quite a while… lua5.1-lunix in v3.5 does not depend on lua5.1
23:48 <jirutka> scanelf does not find dependency on lua lib, but ldd does; probably I just don’t understand how it works