Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

What do `lam` and `witnessme` provide that `lookatme` doesn't?

See original GitHub issue

This isn’t really a bug or a feature request. But, I noticed that building this package on NixOS as provided by nixpkgs introduces 3 binaries which seem referenced in your setup.py but which appear redundant, there. However, it appears that these nixpkgs build outputs have different SHAs, so they’re different somehow.

$ md5sum result/bin/*                                                
27e4ed6a63db72685e78134d658c8030  result/bin/lam
00061159564841356ae9f5a91fc2405a  result/bin/lookatme
a5b7324681c66ed3a427fa48dc9b2f36  result/bin/witnessme

Could you please shed some light on how they’re different or why there are other outputs beyond only ./result/bin/lookatme?

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 2 years ago
Comments:5 (2 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

1reaction

aniketgmcommented, Apr 21, 2022

@johnrichardrinehart, it seems the creater of this tool @d0c-s4vage is a MadMax fan “witnessme” 😄

1reaction

johnrichardrinehartcommented, Feb 26, 2022

Huh, strange. Users can alias commands through their shell if they want an abbreviated name. witnessme is strange, too. Would the maintainers accept a pull request to strip the result to only one output (lookatme)?