Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

begriffs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 143 posts

Re: Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

#51

Post by Artlav »

SwellJoe wrote: post #45
corysama wrote: post #12

My Linux experience so far has been limited to ls, cd and vi. From the outside, package management has always seemed to me like a huge mess. But, I've been starting to learn Nix recently and I really like it. I can add, remove, test, screw up, change my mind, whatever without stress.

"From the outside, package management has always seemed to me like a huge mess." Compared to what?! There's no OS that has historically had better (or even close to as good) package management as Linux, either in the form of apt-get/dpkg or yum/RPM. Nix is probably better, on a couple of dimensions, but to suggest it was a mess before...well, I just wonder what you could be comparing to that would be better?

Perhaps it's about expecting to have program locality?

I.e. you download a zip file, you unpack it into a directory, and here is your entire program. Right there, in that directory, not splattered around the filesystem by the package manager.

That's the way it's done on Windows, anyway.

Re: Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

#52

Post by j_s »

SwellJoe wrote: post #45
corysama wrote: post #12

My Linux experience so far has been limited to ls, cd and vi. From the outside, package management has always seemed to me like a huge mess. But, I've been starting to learn Nix recently and I really like it. I can add, remove, test, screw up, change my mind, whatever without stress.

"From the outside, package management has always seemed to me like a huge mess." Compared to what?! There's no OS that has historically had better (or even close to as good) package management as Linux, either in the form of apt-get/dpkg or yum/RPM. Nix is probably better, on a couple of dimensions, but to suggest it was a mess before...well, I just wonder what you could be comparing to that would be better?

Perhaps https://ninite.com/ ?? :)

Re: Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

#53

Post by SwellJoe »

davexunit wrote: post #25
corysama wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like everything else with Gnu, the main difference seems to be philosophical. Guix is fundamentally opposed to pre-compiled binaries. Nix has no issue with them.

>Guix is fundamentally opposed to pre-compiled binaries. Nix has no issue with them. Using pre-compiled binaries means that builds aren't reproducible, a goal of both Nix and Guix.

That doesn't make sense. A reproducible build means that a build done in two different places results in the same binary. It has nothing to do with whether the vendor distributes binaries (with optional source) or source alone. The binary is what matters. i.g., if I build this package myself, will it result in the exact same binary that I download from the vendor?

Binaries can be signed to prove that the chain of trust is unbroken between the vendor (who maybe you trust enough to run their software on your systems) and you. In the case of a system with reproducible builds, that signature also says, "if you were to build this yourself, you'd end up with the same binary I am sending you."

Edit: I am beginning to realize that when davexunit says "pre-compiled binaries" they are not talking about an OS vendor (like Guix) distributing a binary package (with source available). They are talking about binary blobs provided by third parties, and in a form that is not reproducible, such as an nvidia driver kernel blob. This has led to me assuming davexunit is nuts, but apparently it is just that neither of us has been speaking very clearly to each other, and thus we've seemingly been talking past each other.

Re: Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

#55

Post by dbcurtis »

ambrop7 wrote: post #37
dbcurtis wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, Nixos runs their own patched versions of ld and the dynamic loading system calls in libc. The normal lib.so search mechanism is replaced wholesale with "thou shalt link against this dll and no other" on a per-execuatble basis. Multiple versions of .so's don't cause problems, because no executable is depending on a search mechanism it doesn't control.

I think that they don't do too drastic changes. There are certainly checks in the compilation process to not accidentally link to /usr/lib/ libraries, but I think the main problem of finding libraries works with a simple compiler wrapper adding needed -Lflags (for finding libs at compile time) and RPATH entries to binaries (for finding libs at run time). There of course may be "hacks" made to gcc/libc but I don't see…

I agree that the changes are likely not extremely invasive, and I would hesitate to call them "hacks". OTOH, it does make Nixos fundamentally different from other (u)nix systems. They are basically saying it's time to hard-fork the (u)nix philosophy about how dynamic linking is done. They might be right.

It's a very interesting approach, and I want to understand it in detail. I haven't had the time to bring up a Nixos system yet, though.

Re: Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

#56

Post by rb808 »

themartorana wrote: post #4

Anyone using NixOS as a server in production? We're on FreeBSD now but I think Linux in our stack is inevitable (many servers, like Aerospike, are Linux only). There's always Ubuntu, but this looks lovely. I've had my eye on it for a personal Linux workstation but haven't heard anything about it as a server.

If you're a non-trivial shop you'll need to harden it, you're better off with CentOS/RHEL than Ubuntu.

Re: Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

#57

Post by davexunit »

corysama wrote: post #41
davexunit wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The build is a source to binary function. How does one reproduce the binary blob? How does one know that binary hasn't been tampered with?

How does one reproduce a .c file? By copying the file. Either way, you know the bits of both the .c and the .so have not been tampered with because you can verify their hashes. Again, it's a philosophical distinction, not a technical one.

It is both a technical and social problem. Please read: https://reproducible-builds.org/

Re: Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

#58

Post by _bpo »

SwellJoe wrote: post #45
corysama wrote: post #12

My Linux experience so far has been limited to ls, cd and vi. From the outside, package management has always seemed to me like a huge mess. But, I've been starting to learn Nix recently and I really like it. I can add, remove, test, screw up, change my mind, whatever without stress.

"From the outside, package management has always seemed to me like a huge mess." Compared to what?! There's no OS that has historically had better (or even close to as good) package management as Linux, either in the form of apt-get/dpkg or yum/RPM. Nix is probably better, on a couple of dimensions, but to suggest it was a mess before...well, I just wonder what you could be comparing to that would be better?

It doesn't need to be compared to anything to be called a mess. dpkg/rpm have been widely useful, but package and dependency management is still a PITA.

Re: Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

#59

Post by dbcurtis »

vertex-four wrote: post #34
dbcurtis wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After a quick look at Nix syntax, it seems to me that it is almost JSON but different enough to required all new parsers. Maybe I'm wrong about that. But... why not just use JSON?

Nix is actually a purely function programming language - you can embed function calls in it. This is used to great effect in various parts of nixpkgs - the entire thing is actually a program which returns the Nix package tree (but is not fully evaluated unless you explicitly ask for it).

OK, I replace my naive question above with a different naive question: "Why not just use Haskell?"

Re: Purely Functional Linux with NixOS [video]

#60

Post by tikhonj »

teh wrote: post #13
themartorana wrote: post #4

Anyone using NixOS as a server in production? We're on FreeBSD now but I think Linux in our stack is inevitable (many servers, like Aerospike, are Linux only). There's always Ubuntu, but this looks lovely. I've had my eye on it for a personal Linux workstation but haven't heard anything about it as a server.

We run a fleet. Happy to answer questions here or shoot us a mail at team@wearewizards.io if it's sensitive.

Do you have a blog post about it or something? I don't have specific questions, I'd just love to see how Nix looks in production.
Post reply on HN