Live data from Hacker News

NixOS 26.05

nixos.org

31–40 of 106 posts

Re: NixOS 26.05

#31

I switched my workstation over to NixOS ~6 weeks ago and it's been really good, I'm a total convert. The thing that really got me over the hump was entirely configuring it using Claude Code. One unexpected benefit is that both my workstation and my backup laptop have the same setup, so I can run updates on the scratch box before doing my workstation. I decided to run the "latest" rather than 25.11 release, so it's ni…

I eventually gave up using mason and lsp servers and used nixvim

https://github.com/will-x86/nixos-dotfiles

( ./home/base/nixvim)

Re: NixOS 26.05

#32

I switched my workstation over to NixOS ~6 weeks ago and it's been really good, I'm a total convert. The thing that really got me over the hump was entirely configuring it using Claude Code. One unexpected benefit is that both my workstation and my backup laptop have the same setup, so I can run updates on the scratch box before doing my workstation. I decided to run the "latest" rather than 25.11 release, so it's ni…

> entirely configuring it using Claude Code This scares me. I would not want AI to run my computer systems.

I'm no AI booster by any stretch of the imagination, but it's not "run[ning] ... computer systems" in this case. Your NixOS setup is defined by declarative config files, and nix builds or updates a working system from them. AI in this case is just writing the config files, which you'd then (hopefully) read and at least vaguely understand before applying them.

Re: NixOS 26.05

#33
post #21

> The 26.05 release was made possible due to the efforts of 2842 contributors, who authored 59703 commits since the previous release. Maybe they should think about increasing their release cycle, that sounds completely unmanageable. After 10 years in my company I have around 1,500 commits in total, it would take me 390 years to author 60K.

The majority of these commits are to keep packages up to date. Easy to get an incredibly high number of commits when nixpkgs is a monorepo containing the definition of 140000 packages

Good to know. I am entirely against monorepos but in the very specific case of NixOS I get how it can actually make sense.

Re: NixOS 26.05

#34
Why don’t more people use NixOS on servers?

Is it because of no LTS?

And is having a LTS somewhat the antithesis of what NixOS represents?

Re: NixOS 26.05

#35
post #22

I'd love to try NixOS but I still have PTSD from trying to run/use Nix on MacOS, across two separate profiles on the same physical device too.

On macOS I settled for Nix + HomeManager rather than going fully nix-darwin

I wonder how common this set-up is, but it's what I settled on as well (my flake contains 8 other NixOS hosts with common home-manager config).

Sometimes I wish I could control more things using nix-darwin but then I remember I like mostly defaults on System Settings.

Re: NixOS 26.05

#36

I switched my workstation over to NixOS ~6 weeks ago and it's been really good, I'm a total convert. The thing that really got me over the hump was entirely configuring it using Claude Code. One unexpected benefit is that both my workstation and my backup laptop have the same setup, so I can run updates on the scratch box before doing my workstation. I decided to run the "latest" rather than 25.11 release, so it's ni…

> entirely configuring it using Claude Code This scares me. I would not want AI to run my computer systems.

that's quite interesting because I would love for AI to run my systems, given it is capable enough (and it is given right tools). Jarvis anyone?

Re: NixOS 26.05

#37
post #10

NixOS has been my daily driver since 2022/2023 and I have greatly improved the management of my 2 computers and few VMs since. Because of LLMs, I now understand the language much better, but even if I didn't want to write Nix directly, describing the config to AI usually produces good results. The two main sticking points IMO are still: - Development environments are still a pain. devenv.sh is great for web and backe…

> Development environments are still a pain. devenv.sh is great for web and backend

Weird, development environments are one of my favorite things about nix. I don't use anything like devenv.sh, just add a `flake.nix` to the repo defining a devShell, and then add `use flake` to `.envrc` and let direnv activate it. Every major and most minor editors have support for direnv, and if they don't, you can just launch them from a shell in that directory. This makes the only system dependencies for a great dev environment nix and direnv.

> I'm increasingly concerned with AUR-like trust issues

Once you've done it a few times, most things are pretty easy to package yourself, and you can just check those derivations into your git repo for your machines and use them. Especially if you're using LLMs, it shouldn't be all that hard to package what you need in most cases. For stuff that's more complicated or difficult, it's more likely there will be some kind of de facto standard flake for it.

Re: NixOS 26.05

#38

I would love a Bazzite-style nixos distribution. Like batteries-included for gaming. Is this kind of thing common in the NixOS space ? Like configs you can import that manage 99% of the os for you ?

There are templates for deploying NixOS but almost all that I've encountered are heavily opinionated and thus only kinda work for specific people (usually the ones that designed them). Then when you want to customize them it's almost always easier to start from scratch.

Re: NixOS 26.05

#39
post #5

I had quite a rollercoaster going from Windows 10 to Arch to Windows and then settling on NixOS. Main reason being able to do clean package/program setup and centralize, version-control my configuration. My main issue with Arch was that after installing and trying stuff it left OS dirty even after package removal. This might be because I had some things built and installed through AUR (e.g. latest mpv releases that s…

> installed through AUR (e.g. latest mpv releases that sometimes broke)

On my home system I'd do this to switch to a new mpv release:

"gitty mpv"

(This is my alias to check out the latest mpv sources, from github, via git clone URL_HERE.)

Scripts repackage mpv into .tar.xz after this git clone step.

Then I do:

"clangy mpv"

clangy is my alias to compile via clang from llvm; and the specific instructions would be found in my COOKBOOKS_DIRECTORY aka recipes (similar to homebrew, but in .yml files), where all information is gathered from mpv.yml then.

One setting there is:

   prefix: f
This means "non-traditional prefix", aka "AppDir" prefix. AppDir prefix is how GoboLinux installs software, e. g. in /Programs/Mpv/22.06.2026/ (I keep the dd.mm.yyyy notation, but this can be toggled; on my home system I use /home/Programs/ though rather than /Programs/ for historic reasons, and also as I want to backup my /home/ directory, including all programs).

So the above would, via clang, compile mpv from source (if the git clone worked), into the AppDir prefix. Then it would simply create symlinks and so some more processing, so /usr/bin/mpv would point at /home/Programs/Mpv/Current/bin/mpv, and Current is a Symlink to the current version in use. I can keep old entries of mpv under /home/Programs/Mpv/ so switching is trivial. And cleaning up is also trivial, I remove e. g. an old mpv version there, then call one post-removal script (or I simply pass the name of it, but I find it easier to work via the commandline in two steps here). The benefit of the above is that, for instance compared to your "latest mpv release sometimes broke", this would not affect me, the old mpv versions would work still, and there can not be any outside installation other than the versioned AppDir.

Right now my /home/Programs/ has 499 entries. I'll eventually have all programs there, and work, then I'll switch to a completely custom LFS/BLFS. Right now my base system is manjaro, which works very well as a base system, even though it uses systemd. /lib/ is a symlink on manjaro by default towards /usr/lib/ and so forth. I find this works so much better than e. g. debian.

> Got increasingly annoyed by Microslop and tried NixOS. Bumpy ride initially but after committing for few weeks I am finally settling on it be the last OS I need.

Not disagreeing at all, but imo the issue you had with AUR is one that by design could be completely avoided. I am not saying this is your fault, mind you; just pointing out that this may be an assumption by both AUR as well as you, since your expectation is to trust the package manager. Here, my input would be the question whether a package manager would be necessary in the first place or not (I still have scripts to handle that, mind you, but the assumptions made via AUR may be wrong in many areas, including not offering versioned AppDirs by default. I don't understand why all package managers do not offer versioned AppDirs; it would solve so many issues).

I should add that some programs are harder to install from source, but mpv works very well; ffmpeg too, surprisingly enough. LLVM/clang is a bit harder to setup, and by far the worst offender is firefox. Mozilla should be ashamed of mozconfig for life.

Re: NixOS 26.05

#40
I love seeing all these posts from NixOS newcomers! It seems anecdotally like LLMs have really given it a boost recently, I guess by reducing the intimidation factor of the language and the unfamiliarity? Of all the positive and negative outcomes I have imagined from LLMs, NixOS becoming popular was not one of them, but I'll take it.
Post reply on HN