Rare project developers

[mc36 <>]

> Nix deals with this by allowing the location of the CA bundle to be
> overridden by the environment. In the standard installation we use,
> this is done by default. E.g. on a Debian system, Nix will actually
> use /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt, which can be kept up to date
> independently.

somehow i still find some, and as i see their openjdk compiled with the 
bundled cacerts....

rare@poz0001:/nix/store$ find . | grep cacert
./yvk26y8bj8zwb6ipp7bm8jv57pv02sn5-nss-cacert-3.49.2
./yvk26y8bj8zwb6ipp7bm8jv57pv02sn5-nss-cacert-3.49.2/etc
./yvk26y8bj8zwb6ipp7bm8jv57pv02sn5-nss-cacert-3.49.2/etc/ssl
./yvk26y8bj8zwb6ipp7bm8jv57pv02sn5-nss-cacert-3.49.2/etc/ssl/certs
./yvk26y8bj8zwb6ipp7bm8jv57pv02sn5-nss-cacert-3.49.2/etc/ssl/certs/ca-bundle.crt
./yvk26y8bj8zwb6ipp7bm8jv57pv02sn5-nss-cacert-3.49.2/nix-support
./yvk26y8bj8zwb6ipp7bm8jv57pv02sn5-nss-cacert-3.49.2/nix-support/setup-hook
./6xbx7vhkk0gpc86rp6zrdahaqpz27ppw-bf-utils-9.7.2/lib/python3.8/site-packages/pip/_vendor/certifi/cacert.pem
./6xbx7vhkk0gpc86rp6zrdahaqpz27ppw-bf-utils-9.7.2/lib/python3.8/test/pycacert.pem
./z52xqzn9l743ajlfw873j93h5rxrwzz9-source/pkgs/development/compilers/openjdk/generate-cacerts.pl
./z52xqzn9l743ajlfw873j93h5rxrwzz9-source/pkgs/data/misc/cacert
./z52xqzn9l743ajlfw873j93h5rxrwzz9-source/pkgs/data/misc/cacert/setup-hook.sh
./z52xqzn9l743ajlfw873j93h5rxrwzz9-source/pkgs/data/misc/cacert/default.nix
./h128b1jcvqh3g6l78c1s0jwdmm0wwj1a-openjdk-headless-14.0.2-ga/lib/openjdk/lib/security/cacerts
./7yx2ng37byikwxf4a2b08aqkjp23r2zc-openjdk-headless-14.0.2-ga-minimal-jre/lib/security/cacerts
./rp8sj2a669h8gknh8xnvwb5ab6p15352-nss-cacert-3.56.drv
rare@poz0001:/nix/store$



> > 9.1.1 surely was designed to debian10 or older with it's old kernel,
> > so imho the kernel modules from the sde does not compile for the current
> > image we're on... simply those old kernel modules dont have the ifdefs
> > for the newer kernels...
>
> I would notice if something doesn't compile, don't you think? I
> back-ported a few changes from 9.2.0 to 9.1.1 back then for that
> purpose.  All SDEs compile and they all work on kernels all the way to
> Debian 11.4.
okk then...



> > moreover, once debian12 will be out, i bet you they'll require even newer 
> > packages...
> > so i believe you that for now you found a point in time when all your current 
> > sdes
> > compile and do something at least in model mode but believe me, that'll 
> > change with
> > as time passes by...
>
> Look, you can really leave that up to me as the maintainer of these
> packages. When I can support older stuff with minimal effort, I do
> so. I also have no problem to drop things when it takes more work than
> it's worth. Neither is it a problem to move to a newer version of
> nixpkgs at some point (I definitely will). If you find an *actual*
> problem (as opposed to speculations or misconceptions, no offense
> intended), I'll be happy to deal with it. I haven't seen one so far :)
okk then....


> We can move to a different version of nixpkgs for freerouter, as I
> already proposed, to disentangle that from the SDE.
sounds cool, let's do that then...

thanks,
cs