2 ms·
> How many containerization concepts do we need? Nix and NixOS aren't containers (or VMs, etc.). > If it were a legitimate abstraction layer, then wouldn't it
by chriswarbo 5y ago
> How many containerization concepts do we need?
Nix and NixOS aren't containers (or VMs, etc.).
> If it were a legitimate abstraction layer, then wouldn't it have caused fewer problems in implementation? And wouldn't it have seemed more intuitive to Unix experts? Yes... Reinventing the wheel again.
The basic concept of Nix is (a) use the `--prefix` argument of ./configure scripts to keep things apart, and (b) use the `PATH` end var to choose what we want to run.
In comparison, containers are much more recent, require more invasive changes (i.e. support from the kernel), etc.
Personally, I like using containers to run binaries. Putting a whole Linux/Busybox installation inside one seems to defeat the point though...
- temptemptemp111 5y agoYes I realize this... People are using different words often when trying to accomplish the same thing and thus confusing themselves. For example, how many people are using configuration management like chef inside of Docker images? Too many, clearly! How much developer time is being burnt unnecessarily with NixOS? I just don't see what would count as engineering evidence that NixOS is simplifying complexity instead of hiding it.