4 ms·
> In the long run, I really hope Guix manages to get something good going. My biggest concern for Guix is that they will restrict the available packages by bein
by rekado 8y ago
> In the long run, I really hope Guix manages to get something good going. My biggest concern for Guix is that they will restrict the available packages by being overly zealous about package-licensing (like everything the FSF does).
Guix co-maintainer here. The Guix project is not run by the FSF; it is part of the GNU project, because we subscribe to the idea of giving users the tools to take control of their computing.
Packages available through the official Guix channel must be compliant with the Free System Distribution Guidelines:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html
The large package collection that comes with Guix is trivially extended through channels: a git repository containing Guix modules defining extra packages. You can do without git and just add a local directory of modules to GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH.
At the institute where I work we're using channels to provide packages that are not available in Guix proper. It's very simple.
- profsnuggles 8y agoI recently posted on HN complaining about Nix and Guix. For myself (and I suspect many people) when installing GuixSD, before I even have the system running, I'm going to need to figure out how to package the Linux kernel with firmware for my wifi. Otherwise my ~$3k laptop is basically a brick. That is a big ask right up front. Glancing at the mailing list it seems like discussing non-free software is discouraged. Even if there is some well maintained Linux package on Github it would be difficult to find and evaluate before having any experience with Guix. It is your project and you can obviously have whatever rules you want. It just seems that Guix and Nix made some odd choices that are going to keep both projects in a very small niche.