On 2/23/26 06:28, Alyssa Ross wrote: > Demi Marie Obenour writes: > >> On 2/9/26 14:41, Alyssa Ross wrote: >>> Demi Marie Obenour writes: >>> >>>> On 2/9/26 03:02, Yureka wrote: >>>>> My systems attempted to build a spectrum image against nixpkgs master >>>>> last night, and failed because of pkgsMusl.netpbm and pkgsMusl.gdb, >>>>> which are known blockers since the GCC 15 updates: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20author%3Ayuyuyureka >>>> >>>> Can those be removed from the closure somehow? >>> >>> I'm pretty sure I answered a very similar question last time, but just >>> in case: it would likely be more ongoing maintenance work to maintain >>> closure reducing overrides than it would be to fix the occasional build >>> failure of a dependency that is not strictly required, at least until we >>> have better tooling for identifying problematic Nixpkgs changes. In >>> addition, that larger amount of work would have less overall utility, >>> because package fixes benefit other Nixpkgs users, whereas adding to an >>> ever-expanding list of local overrides does not. >> >> What would the plan be if Spectrum had already been released? >> Not being able to ship security fixes while nixpkgs is fixed >> would be bad. > > We'd, in rough order of preference: > > - Use an overlay to apply a patch downstream > - Use an overlay to temporarily disable dependencies > - Use a modified Nixpkgs input Thank you! I've seen Fedora delay updates for too long because of problems like this, and I know that Spectrum aims to be a rolling release which means regular updates. So it's good to know that it will be able to keep updating even when glitches like this arise. -- Sincerely, Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)