3 ms·

You're stating a lot of interesting opinions, but I do not see any arguments to help describe why you feel that way. How exactly is Nix monolithic or proprietar

You're stating a lot of interesting opinions, but I do not see any arguments to help describe why you feel that way. How exactly is Nix monolithic or proprietary? And what is complicated about it? It seems pretty simple to me, if not at odds with how other package managers do things. It's one of the few package managers that can successfully work across multiple Linux distributions, some BSD systems, MacOS, and even Windows for some software. In my opinion it's the least proprietary or monolithic package managers around, the other being Guix which follows the same principles. But I think the biggest issue is in your last paragraph where you don't describe why or how the solution needs to happen in the software itself rather than at a higher level.

goosedragons 5y ago
If you need something that exists outside the repository it can get complicated. Even playing within the repository can have pitfalls at least on Guix which is what I've mainly used (like having a package appear in two profiles can cause issues that are non-obvious or like using "guix shell gcc binutils" instead of " guix shell gcc-toolchain"). Some of that has to do with the fact of what an expected *nix install is supposed to be and expectations of what should be installed on a users system and so are not marked as dependencies or requirements when they really are. I am curious about how a system designed from the ground up with this in mind might be better.