This…is not what this project represents or is meant for. Christ.
I can’t count the number of times people gloss over the actual useful tools they are given in the immutable world, and try and distill it down to being about desktop bullshit.
NIX IS FOR REPRODUCIBLE BUILDS. That’s fucking it, seriously. It’s literally on their website.
Stop trying to put a hat on a hat for some random crap you thought was a good idea.
IT’S A HORRIFIC EXPERIENCE FOR NEW USERS TRYING TO RUN A DESKTOP. Steer clear.
Edit: this is some dumb shit
Although we cannot achieve complete system reproducibility, the /home directory, being an important user directory, contains many necessary configuration files
That’s literally all it’s good for… reproducible builds.
Fuck off whoever posted this.
Edit2: oh wait… It’s the boot account that is polluting everything in these threads
Got a lot of use for DE and other gui related modules in that usecase? Are you spinning up KDE to build a container? Did you write to the devs that they remove the installation wizard for desktop use? Did they accidentally add all of the non-reproducible imperative commands to nix?
Get over yourself. It’s a great distro for desktop use, and I seriously don’t get why you’re foaming at the mouth because people are using it differently than you…
No…you CAN install one if you’d like, you waste of space. Just like any other Linux OS, all packages aside from the kernel are optional. Hell, Nix didn’t have anything but the templating setup when I started it using it forever ago. They didn’t have any packages available for any sort of GUI at all.
NIX IS FOR REPRODUCIBLE BUILDS. That’s fucking it, seriously. It’s literally on their website.
This post is specifically about NixOS and friends, though.
IT’S A HORRIFIC EXPERIENCE FOR NEW USERS TRYING TO RUN A DESKTOP. Steer clear.
There are thousands of users who run NixOS on their desktop, and thousands more users of home-manager (or nix-darwin) on macOS. If you are ready to put in the time and learn how it works, it’s wonderful - your entire distribution, the thing through which you interact with computers, becomes just another project in your ~/projects, rather than something you have to manually configure. You can’t forget “how to configure $X”, because it is all recorded in one place and done automatically when you get a new machine or update or whatever. It’s GNU Stow on steroids, for your entire system.
There are a lot of downsides for sure as well (mostly the learning curve, and having to fix the buggy bullshit in some software which only runs well in FHS), but if you are a software developer (or adjacent) and like Linux, NixOS is still awesome.
Yeah but people are still capable of using Arch and imo NixOS is much easier than Arch. Once you figure out how to do something on NixOS you don’t have to go through all the troubleshooting/learning over and over. With Arch it’s an active investment of your time all the time.
So if people are capable of using Arch, then they can handle NixOS. NixOS is hard but it’s not world ending hard.
There’s not a lot of competition in the bleeding edge rolling distro space, so I think it’s fair to compare them. Especially since you’re not forced to make it reproducible.
I wouldn’t suggest either to beginners either though.
Yeah, it does make sense that you can compare them in that sense, but as far as actual system setup goes, I don’t think they’re comparable. Don’t get me wrong, I love NixOS. When I was learning nixlang and setting up everything to be modular and reproducible, I was having a blast.
However, I also had a blast learning Arch and figuring out how my system works the way it does. I’ll be honest, though, NixOS helped me learn how Home was separate from Root. That alone really helped me learn how the general Linux system file hierarchy worked.
But there are also things I would have never learned about Linux if I never messed with Arch, such as essential system symlinks, how they work, and how to use chroot in the live environment to fix broken ones (thanks to a botched Arch update, lol).
If you like it, learn it-use it. All this comparing and inter-distro warring seems pointless. There’s not a distro I’ve used that I haven’t had things I really liked and really hated.
Great points about learning, but I’m just explaining what my original comment was about: daily experience of using a distro and reliability.
For me arch installation was the most educational Linux experience since after 10+ years of using Linux, that was the first time I clearly understood each part of the system. But tbh that knowledge has so far been mostly academic - knowledge for the sake of knowledge.
All this comparing and inter-distro warring seems pointless.
It’s got a point when every thread has people recommending arch, even when it’s not relevant in any way. We’re talking about arch in a thread about a nixos guide after all.
I feel like I learned more about linux and my computer by installing arch (before we had the neat installer we have now). So for me, arch is a better learning tool. I do really like nix (havent used it myself, but Im a functional programmer and declarative configuration is my jam) but it’s definitely a better way of managing an installation than arch I imagine. My next distro if arch ever fails me will be an immutable distro, Nix is definitely top 3 for me that I reach for
I’m talking about day to day usage. Arch installation is a good learning experience, but running it for me was more trouble than it’s worth.
The worst issue I’ve had so far with nix is an update failing before it’s applied because of some package. Meanwhile arch would regularly update, and then fail to boot or break something.
I gave up on arch after a few years when I had to literally weigh whether -S or -Syu would be more likely to mess up my system while I was working abroad.
This…is not what this project represents or is meant for. Christ.
I can’t count the number of times people gloss over the actual useful tools they are given in the immutable world, and try and distill it down to being about desktop bullshit.
NIX IS FOR REPRODUCIBLE BUILDS. That’s fucking it, seriously. It’s literally on their website.
Stop trying to put a hat on a hat for some random crap you thought was a good idea.
IT’S A HORRIFIC EXPERIENCE FOR NEW USERS TRYING TO RUN A DESKTOP. Steer clear.
Edit: this is some dumb shit
That’s literally all it’s good for… reproducible builds.
Fuck off whoever posted this.
Edit2: oh wait… It’s the boot account that is polluting everything in these threads
What do you think nixos is for?
Tell me you didn’t run nixos without telling me you didn’t run nixos
I use it for reproducible builds in packaging and CI/CD pipelines because…that’s what it’s made for.
Got a lot of use for DE and other gui related modules in that usecase? Are you spinning up KDE to build a container? Did you write to the devs that they remove the installation wizard for desktop use? Did they accidentally add all of the non-reproducible imperative commands to nix?
Get over yourself. It’s a great distro for desktop use, and I seriously don’t get why you’re foaming at the mouth because people are using it differently than you…
Lol wut?? No.
No there is no desktop in a packaging, CI, or CD pipelines 🤣🤣🤣
What on earth are you talking about.
But there is in nixos you donkey…
No…you CAN install one if you’d like, you waste of space. Just like any other Linux OS, all packages aside from the kernel are optional. Hell, Nix didn’t have anything but the templating setup when I started it using it forever ago. They didn’t have any packages available for any sort of GUI at all.
Get outta here with your uninformed idiocy.
This post is specifically about NixOS and friends, though.
There are thousands of users who run NixOS on their desktop, and thousands more users of home-manager (or nix-darwin) on macOS. If you are ready to put in the time and learn how it works, it’s wonderful - your entire distribution, the thing through which you interact with computers, becomes just another project in your ~/projects, rather than something you have to manually configure. You can’t forget “how to configure $X”, because it is all recorded in one place and done automatically when you get a new machine or update or whatever. It’s GNU Stow on steroids, for your entire system.
There are a lot of downsides for sure as well (mostly the learning curve, and having to fix the buggy bullshit in some software which only runs well in FHS), but if you are a software developer (or adjacent) and like Linux, NixOS is still awesome.
Same can be said for Arch but people still install it as their first distro.
Because there are people recommending it which is nuts
Yeah but people are still capable of using Arch and imo NixOS is much easier than Arch. Once you figure out how to do something on NixOS you don’t have to go through all the troubleshooting/learning over and over. With Arch it’s an active investment of your time all the time.
So if people are capable of using Arch, then they can handle NixOS. NixOS is hard but it’s not world ending hard.
That’s how learning works.
You should try it.iusearchbtw
Nixos > arch without a question
I’m more in the group of Nix != Arch. They’re just different. I love them both, tbh.
I would like to add that I have never recommended them to beginners. I usually like to recommend Pop!_OS.
I really have been wanting to try Bazzite lately, too.
There’s not a lot of competition in the bleeding edge rolling distro space, so I think it’s fair to compare them. Especially since you’re not forced to make it reproducible.
I wouldn’t suggest either to beginners either though.
Yeah, it does make sense that you can compare them in that sense, but as far as actual system setup goes, I don’t think they’re comparable. Don’t get me wrong, I love NixOS. When I was learning nixlang and setting up everything to be modular and reproducible, I was having a blast.
However, I also had a blast learning Arch and figuring out how my system works the way it does. I’ll be honest, though, NixOS helped me learn how Home was separate from Root. That alone really helped me learn how the general Linux system file hierarchy worked.
But there are also things I would have never learned about Linux if I never messed with Arch, such as essential system symlinks, how they work, and how to use chroot in the live environment to fix broken ones (thanks to a botched Arch update, lol).
If you like it, learn it-use it. All this comparing and inter-distro warring seems pointless. There’s not a distro I’ve used that I haven’t had things I really liked and really hated.
Great points about learning, but I’m just explaining what my original comment was about: daily experience of using a distro and reliability.
For me arch installation was the most educational Linux experience since after 10+ years of using Linux, that was the first time I clearly understood each part of the system. But tbh that knowledge has so far been mostly academic - knowledge for the sake of knowledge.
It’s got a point when every thread has people recommending arch, even when it’s not relevant in any way. We’re talking about arch in a thread about a nixos guide after all.
I feel like I learned more about linux and my computer by installing arch (before we had the neat installer we have now). So for me, arch is a better learning tool. I do really like nix (havent used it myself, but Im a functional programmer and declarative configuration is my jam) but it’s definitely a better way of managing an installation than arch I imagine. My next distro if arch ever fails me will be an immutable distro, Nix is definitely top 3 for me that I reach for
I’m talking about day to day usage. Arch installation is a good learning experience, but running it for me was more trouble than it’s worth.
The worst issue I’ve had so far with nix is an update failing before it’s applied because of some package. Meanwhile arch would regularly update, and then fail to boot or break something.
I gave up on arch after a few years when I had to literally weigh whether -S or -Syu would be more likely to mess up my system while I was working abroad.
Same