3 ms·

> Not systemd based. Say of systemd what you will, but there is a reason almost every distro has adopted it. It's just better. Also: most Linux users are famili

> Not systemd based. Say of systemd what you will, but there is a reason almost every distro has adopted it. It's just better. Also: most Linux users are familiar with systemd tooling by now, so that makes adoption even harder. Yet, the only reason you are most likely giving this one piece of software special treatment, among the many other different pieces of software in NixOS and GuixSD, is as reactionism to the many, just as vocal voices, that chose not to adopt it, with just as much fanfare to the mention of not doing so. It strikes me as odd to list as an objective advantage the one piece of software that has been the most controversial in the last decade, and it's controversy is most likely the reason you decided to mention it.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
zxzax 5y ago
I can't say I agree with your assessment. As someone who has used both, there are a lot of nice things in systemd that aren't really present in GNU shepherd (yet?)
- Blikkentrekker 5y ago
  What does that have to with my assessment? Nothing in my post compared systemd with shepherd or talked about any of the features of either. — it simply pointed out that systemd was specifically chosen of all software that GuixSD does not have because there's often debate about it, not for technical reasons.
  - zxzax 5y ago
    I don't know about other places, but here I don't agree that it wasn't for technical reasons. To me it seems like one of the key differences between them. Guix wants to have all the package and service definitions written in Scheme. Otherwise systemd would probably work well for them, judging by the usage in Nix anyway.
    - Blikkentrekker 5y ago
      Guix has nothing to do with systemd, GuixSD does. — the two are distinct. There is no reason why Guix can't be used to install systemd, but the software runs contrary to the GuixSD philosophy, in that it wants as much as possible to be an interpreter whose internals are hackable.
      - zxzax 5y ago
        Again I don't think that's a correct assessment, Guix actually does have some overlap with systemd because they decided to put some containerization things there. In Nix, this would be delegated to systemd. I also wouldn't say that that runs contrary to the GuixSD philosophy, as there are a lot of packages in Guix that are written in C and C++ and other compiled languages, and I don't believe they plan to replace them. Maybe I'm wrong about that? At some point it might be interesting to have a Lisp/Scheme-only distro. Of course the kernel would still pose a problem there.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

zxzax 5y ago

I can't say I agree with your assessment. As someone who has used both, there are a lot of nice things in systemd that aren't really present in GNU shepherd (yet?)

Blikkentrekker 5y ago
What does that have to with my assessment? Nothing in my post compared systemd with shepherd or talked about any of the features of either. — it simply pointed out that systemd was specifically chosen of all software that GuixSD does not have because there's often debate about it, not for technical reasons.
- zxzax 5y ago
  I don't know about other places, but here I don't agree that it wasn't for technical reasons. To me it seems like one of the key differences between them. Guix wants to have all the package and service definitions written in Scheme. Otherwise systemd would probably work well for them, judging by the usage in Nix anyway.
  - Blikkentrekker 5y ago
    Guix has nothing to do with systemd, GuixSD does. — the two are distinct. There is no reason why Guix can't be used to install systemd, but the software runs contrary to the GuixSD philosophy, in that it wants as much as possible to be an interpreter whose internals are hackable.
    - zxzax 5y ago
      Again I don't think that's a correct assessment, Guix actually does have some overlap with systemd because they decided to put some containerization things there. In Nix, this would be delegated to systemd. I also wouldn't say that that runs contrary to the GuixSD philosophy, as there are a lot of packages in Guix that are written in C and C++ and other compiled languages, and I don't believe they plan to replace them. Maybe I'm wrong about that? At some point it might be interesting to have a Lisp/Scheme-only distro. Of course the kernel would still pose a problem there.