←back to thread

198 points todsacerdoti | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.213s | source
Show context
idlip ◴[] No.44573461[source]
Its nice read. We need more of comparative posts by user familiar with both nix and guix.

We see bias with most discussions.

Only cons with Guix I see is, lack of infrastructure and less volunteers to work on guix eco-system. If its solved, I can imagine guix can improve exponentially.

replies(4): >>44607020 #>>44607098 #>>44608492 #>>44609855 #
msgilligan ◴[] No.44608492[source]
> We need more of comparative posts

The article focuses on a comparison between GUIX _system_ and NixOS. It would be interesting to see an equally thoughtful comparison that just focuses on GUIX vs. NIX as package managers used on another Linux distribution (e.g. Debian.)

In this case, GUIX might fare better as you won't have to worry about the complexities introduced by binary blobs needed for boot, etc.

replies(1): >>44616238 #
1. spease ◴[] No.44616238[source]
Personally, I’d really like a crossplatform declarative package manager in a mainstream or mainstream-style language, where the nixpkgs equivalent can be JITed or AOTed including the shell scripts, so it isn’t painful to work with and can switch into an environment almost instantly.

Though nix the language syntactically isn’t that complex, it’s really the way that nixpkgs and things like overrides are implemented, the lack of a standard interface between environments and Darwin and NixOS, needing overlays with multiple levels of depth, etc that makes things complex.

The infuriating thing about nix is that it’s functionally capable of doing what I want, but it’s patently obvious that the people at the wheel are not particularly inclined to design things for a casual user who cannot keep a hundred idiosyncrasies in their head memorized just to work on their build scripts.