2 ms·
That makes sense, but every pinned package contributes to the packaging burden. In order to reduce the burden to what traditional distributions have to deal wit
by rhn_mk1 7y ago
That makes sense, but every pinned package contributes to the packaging burden. In order to reduce the burden to what traditional distributions have to deal with, pinning would have to be disallowed, which now resembles the traditional approach a lot, with one version per package.
- m45t3r 7y agoWell, most packages does not pin dependencies. From the top of my head, proprietary packages generally pin dependencies, however in this case it is because proprietary packages are known to broke when a random library updates. When I was referring to pinning, it is mostly done locally. I do sometimes, for example, pinning a specific package to a specific commit of Nixpkgs, so I can either backport a new version or avoid some change that I don't want to deal at the moment.