3 ms·

I like them both, both interesting, quite similar, both with corner cases Annoyingly both fail at basic stuff like falling back the graphics card, something De

I like them both, both interesting, quite similar, both with corner cases Annoyingly both fail at basic stuff like falling back the graphics card, something Debian had solved 10 years ago, no configs needed, no matter Intel/NVIDIA/AMD. Even without the correct driver or firmware falling back to VESA or fbdev should be a given. Never had so many black screens as now. Even Windows has done better job at giving you a basic resolution while you install the drivers Or maybe it's just the state of the Linux ecosystem, with the introduction of Wayland and NVIDIA open drivers, causing regressions Also the unintuitive inverse of traditional package management, where if you want to update one package, all the system updates by default Which increases the amount of bugs, having frequent updates to a stable system To make it better you can add 2 channels, and call them nixos-stable v24 nixos-latest v25, keeping most of the system one version down increases stability a lot Of course the incorporated Grub boot build choices is great to revert back to a working system I really like the the separation Guix makes on having close source being a concern of a separate project But both of them are equally easy to install open source only or include proprietary

yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
> But both of them are equally easy to install open source only or include proprietary Unless it really dramatically changed recently, I don't think that's true. Look, here's the official manual page that describes exactly how to enable use of the non-free packages that are right there in the main nixpkgs repo: https://nixos.org/manual/nixpkgs/stable/#sec-allow-unfree https://nixos.org/manual/nixpkgs/stable/#sec-allow-unfree And here's the guix equivalent, maintained in a completely separate repo that you're not allowed to talk about, document, or refer to in any official channels: https://gitlab.com/nonguix/nonguix https://gitlab.com/nonguix/nonguix These are not equal.
- guilhas 1y ago
  > These are not equal. Of course they are. Copy and paste a text snippet to your configuration, and run the cli to refresh Being a separate repo is absolutely OK. Just like installing Nixos's own Home-Manager Or add other people channels, like adding PPA on Ubuntu/debian. Or run flakes... Nixos is possibly makes it more confusing by having the documentation recommend `nix-channel --add` instead of the declarative approach. Having the standard declarative, and having flakes on top And you should probably want to create your own channel. On the week I installed Guix immediately created my channel and packaged ZimWiki
  - yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
    > Of course they are. Copy and paste a text snippet to your configuration, and run the cli to refresh Even in the best case, that requires you to know about it. When you're not allowed to document the option or even mention it in official support channels, that's harder. > Being a separate repo is absolutely OK. Just like installing Nixos's own Home-Manager > Or add other people channels, like adding PPA on Ubuntu/debian. Or run flakes... > And you should probably want to create your own channel. On the week I installed Guix immediately created my channel and packaged ZimWiki All of these things make it harder to use and less likely to stay supported. > Nixos is possibly makes it more confusing by having the documentation recommend `nix-channel --add` instead of the declarative approach. Having the standard declarative, and having flakes on top So... I agree that that's annoying, and I personally would prefer that everyone agree to use flakes, but AFAIK you don't need to do that to enable unfree in nix? Or is this an unrelated argument against nix that's separate from the point about unfree software?
qiine 1y ago
> Also the unintuitive inverse of traditional package management, where if you want to update one package, all the system updates by default What do you mean? ins't that exactly the arch way ? (no partial update supported)
- guilhas 1y ago
  In Arch if I needed something updated today you would have done > pacman -Sy > pacman -S package_name Leavig the rest system unchanged In Nixos > nix-channel --update > Add package to /etc/nixos/configuration.nix > nixos-rebuild switch Which would update everything Maybe we could do > nix-channel --update > nix-env -iA packagename But I am not sure which version would be installed. And it would definitely go against the purpose of using nixos > nix-shell -p package_name It is also quite cool for trying packages without installing permanently

yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago

> But both of them are equally easy to install open source only or include proprietary Unless it really dramatically changed recently, I don't think that's true. Look, here's the official manual page that describes exactly how to enable use of the non-free packages that are right there in the main nixpkgs repo: https://nixos.org/manual/nixpkgs/stable/#sec-allow-unfree https://nixos.org/manual/nixpkgs/stable/#sec-allow-unfree And here's the guix equivalent, maintained in a completely separate repo that you're not allowed to talk about, document, or refer to in any official channels: https://gitlab.com/nonguix/nonguix https://gitlab.com/nonguix/nonguix These are not equal.

guilhas 1y ago
> These are not equal. Of course they are. Copy and paste a text snippet to your configuration, and run the cli to refresh Being a separate repo is absolutely OK. Just like installing Nixos's own Home-Manager Or add other people channels, like adding PPA on Ubuntu/debian. Or run flakes... Nixos is possibly makes it more confusing by having the documentation recommend `nix-channel --add` instead of the declarative approach. Having the standard declarative, and having flakes on top And you should probably want to create your own channel. On the week I installed Guix immediately created my channel and packaged ZimWiki
- yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
  > Of course they are. Copy and paste a text snippet to your configuration, and run the cli to refresh Even in the best case, that requires you to know about it. When you're not allowed to document the option or even mention it in official support channels, that's harder. > Being a separate repo is absolutely OK. Just like installing Nixos's own Home-Manager > Or add other people channels, like adding PPA on Ubuntu/debian. Or run flakes... > And you should probably want to create your own channel. On the week I installed Guix immediately created my channel and packaged ZimWiki All of these things make it harder to use and less likely to stay supported. > Nixos is possibly makes it more confusing by having the documentation recommend `nix-channel --add` instead of the declarative approach. Having the standard declarative, and having flakes on top So... I agree that that's annoying, and I personally would prefer that everyone agree to use flakes, but AFAIK you don't need to do that to enable unfree in nix? Or is this an unrelated argument against nix that's separate from the point about unfree software?

qiine 1y ago

> Also the unintuitive inverse of traditional package management, where if you want to update one package, all the system updates by default What do you mean? ins't that exactly the arch way ? (no partial update supported)

guilhas 1y ago
In Arch if I needed something updated today you would have done > pacman -Sy > pacman -S package_name Leavig the rest system unchanged In Nixos > nix-channel --update > Add package to /etc/nixos/configuration.nix > nixos-rebuild switch Which would update everything Maybe we could do > nix-channel --update > nix-env -iA packagename But I am not sure which version would be installed. And it would definitely go against the purpose of using nixos > nix-shell -p package_name It is also quite cool for trying packages without installing permanently