111–113 of 113 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We're looking to replace s6 with our own supervisor soon. Why? Anything of interest to other Nix users here?
People who are writing software in Nix-based dev envs would be interested in what we're working on, but the featureset is tightly bound to resource limitations and needs, so I can't really say any more without making promises I might not be able to keep, and I would feel bad badmouthing s6 if I couldn't do any better myself.
It feels so painful to go back to ‘regular’ Linux now. I'm so concerned about config file entropy and version incompatibility that Nix has solved for me. I'm happy I took the Nix Pill though and completely skipped over Docker and it's often-unnecessary overhead. Nix store is a better solution to reproducible builds, and the syntax is a lot better than LISP for Guix or whatever Skylark is trying to be. Currently I'm s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you elaborate? Personally I feel like everything else is a dead end compared to Nix
I personally would prefer a build and environment tool which uses the modern Linux namespaces to prepare isolated filesystems without needing to reinvent a whole bunch of wheels. A number of problems that I would like to be fixed: - Post-build patches to insure correct shared library paths in artifacts due to requirement to use absolute /nix/store instead of using the traditional Linux filesystem. - Numerous wrappers…
Yes, having to clean up RPATH after compiling a program sucks. Yes, having to implement workarounds to make build tools that desperately cling to their FHS traditions work sucks. These are effectively bugs and/or design errors in those tools. Packages are supposed to be installable into various different prefixes, Nix or not. That's why ./configure --prefix= exists.
The wheel needed to be reinvented because the old one was square.