[dead]
Why I love NixOS
131–140 of 323 posts
Re: Why I love NixOS
#132I tried NixOS a few months ago, when I had to choose a new OS for my laptop.
On the one hand, it's great, as so many others here and TFA have attested. Declaratively specifying your system configuration and using snapshots to keep track of everything is a complete game-changer. Similarly great is the absolutely huge universe of installable packages. The coverage here is so much better than what's on offer from Ubuntu or Fedora.
On the other hand, the current implementation is still a bit of a shit-show.
First, there's nix-the-OS and nix-the-package-manager which is pretty confusing. Effectively it means you manage your OS with one declarative system and your local/home config with another. Then there's "Flakes" which I never quite understood, that seem to offer a different modality altogether.
Second, installing packages is nice, but also confusing. Do you install a package or a service? Often both are available and the difference is not always clear. Eventually I learned to choose a service whenever one was available. In either case, the tendency of package maintainers is to install the smallest possible version of whatever you asked for. For example, I wanted KDE but what I got was a bare minimum version with plenty of missing apps and functionality that could only be fixed by adding extra components, one at a time, after debugging whatever was currently breaking.
I appreciated that services and packages can be configured in the configuration file. But the options exposed are usually a partial set of what's available -- without extending the installations scripts yourself. So now my "declarative" config is a mix of what's in my nixOS config file and what's in my manually edited /etc files.
Third, the documentation, mentioned by others, is a mess. There's all kinds of information about old and new versions. The interfaces of the command-line tools seem to have changed between the 25.05 stable that I chose and the then-upcoming 25.11, which made following-along harder than it needed to be.
I eventually gave up because I needed a working machine and not a new hobby. I was left with the impression that NixOS might be a good choice for system admins, but perhaps not yet ready for desktop Linux users.
Re: Why I love NixOS
#133The author almost touches on the one more topic that I adore about Nix, but ends up just so missing it: NixOS is absolutely incredible for its ability to be configured through AI tooling. And I don't mean that it's better than other operating systems, I mean that it's the only game in town. I've been using Nix, both the package manager and the operating system, for years by now. I agree with all of the author's point…
I'm not sure how I would've configured my dotfiles without AI. The nix syntax is a bit daunting, but the rollback feature makes me feel confident in modifying my system agentically. The main setbacks are the non-fhs filesystem, which both applications and agents generally expect.
Re: Why I love NixOS
#134The author almost touches on the one more topic that I adore about Nix, but ends up just so missing it: NixOS is absolutely incredible for its ability to be configured through AI tooling. And I don't mean that it's better than other operating systems, I mean that it's the only game in town. I've been using Nix, both the package manager and the operating system, for years by now. I agree with all of the author's point…
I put a Claude Code token on all my machines, local and cloud. Machines now practically fix themselves. Especially with NixOS, as soon as the basic install runs, it gets the Nix claude-code package. It's all downhill after that. OpenClaw hit a few weeks ago, so I took an ancient PC lying around, put NixOS on it, added Claude Code, and then Claude installed OpenClaw. Claude, tell me about the security posture of OpenClaw. "Would you like me to turn on the exec permissions feature and disable dangerous commands?" Claude does that and then turns around and tests that they are really turned off. My Telegram bot gets confused: "I'm sorry, I don't have a shell/exec to run that command. How did I run anything a few minutes ago?"
Re: Why I love NixOS
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you use the flake system (which is technically still experimental, but everyone is already using it anyway), all your flake 'inputs' are automatically pinned in a flake.lock file that can be committed to git for reproducibility. So if you add nixpkgs as a flake input, your nix expressions will always be referring to the same exact package versions until you update the lock file. The downside is that flake inputs r…
Ok, but I guess a more concrete version of my question is the following: > How do I set up my development environment using devenv.sh to pin nodejs to 24.14.0? If I understand your response correctly, I can't do this in any very practical way.
Generally something like
languages.javascript.enable = true
languages.javascript.package = pkgs.nodejs_24Re: Why I love NixOS
#136> services.desktopManager.gnome.extraGSettingsOverrides =
You can set dconf settings more declaratively: https://tangled.org/jonathan.dickinson.id/nix/blob/7c895ada8...
Re: Why I love NixOS
#137> I can specify the whole OS including the packages I need and the configuration in one declarative setup. That one place aspect matters to me more than it might sound at first.
It took me less than a day of experimenting with it to learn that it is one place only in theory.
The second you start googling „how do I install xyz“ you discover there are also flakes. And others have some sort of convoluted git like method. And there is a package manager thing. And the direct config file editing like in this article. And a disposable temp install of some sort. And naturally software guides don’t give you instructions for all - they’re opinionated.
Felt a lot like being on Debian and the software only comes in .rpm
That really took the wind out of my sails because like OP I liked the basic config file part
Re: Why I love NixOS
#138I switched over to Nix about a year ago. I was a Windows user before that for 30 years and tried Linux a couple of times, but it never stuck. Now I know I will never touch Windows again. With NixOS I've finally found a system that actually works for me — and the full OS configuration is in a repo. My god, I love it so much. Sometimes I even prefer nix-shells over uv for quick one-off Python scripts. I cannot sufficie…
Have you heard of any good projects for running isolated containers in NixOS that are cheaply derived from your own NixOS config? Because that is what I want. I want a computer where I can basically install every non stock app in its own little world, where it thinks "huh, that is interesting, I seem to be the only app installed on this system". Basically, I want to be able to run completely unverified code off of th…
Sounds like Ghaf might be what you're after: https://ghaf.tii.ae/ghaf/overview
Re: Why I love NixOS
#139I'd love NixOS more if they had any decent documentation. Everything seems scattered around a dozen forums, a hundred old blog posts, and a thousand issues of "this work on my machine (3 releases ago)".
You know, I used to agree, but what I realized, is I am a software engineer, and I'm used to working in large projects with source-code as the only documentation. And that's what's great about NixOS, you just clone nixpkgs and treat it like any other underdocumented software you might work on.
> I'm used to working in large projects with source-code as the only documentation.
As a software engineer I have an opposing attitude towards this. I work on projects with terrible documentation because somebody pays me to do so or there is a significant potential that I can unlock.
There are significant alternatives to NixOS like bootable containers and OSTree which are more useful and better documented. If Nix project really cares about being competitive and adopt users, they have to document their stuff. They are already going against the grain and ain't nobody has time to put up with their weird language and their subpar documentation.
Re: Why I love NixOS
#140Although I’ve never committed to using nix system-wide, I do enjoy nix-based using https://devenv.sh/ for the very reasons described in the article. It’s much easier than local containers for development.
I've never really understood how version pinning is meant to work with devenv.sh or Nix more generally. If I whack a .tool-versions file in my repo, everyone who works on it can use install the exact same versions of the relevant tools using asdf. That's low tech and imperfect (and certainly not a replacement for all of Nix's features), but it works as far as it goes. None of the examples on the devenv.sh page demons…
It's one of my complaints too.
The way to do it is to find the `nixpkgs` version which contains the version of the tool you care about. There's a web site[1] that makes this pretty easy, and it's of course also doable by looking at the Git history for the program's derivation.
Then you create a named input using that nixpkgs version: either add it as a channel, import it with fetchTarball in a derivation, or add it as an input in your flake, depending on what you're doing. Then you use that named nixpkgs (or other input in the flake case) for that version of the package.
Edit: One issue with depending on things like git tags or semver versions is that sometimes people re-use versions or edit tags. Using the actual git commit hashes of the package's derivation avoids this potential ambiguity. This is why we can't have nice things.