Well let’s see if it is worth it or if I go back to debian.

  • taanegl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    8 months ago

    Me: *declares an app*\

    nixpkgs: Oh what’s that, you wanted an entire extra desktop stack inside a separate closure? Yes, sir!

    Me: plz no

    • pbsds@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      7 months ago

      Try installing a cinnamon app on a gnome distro and you get the same dependencies pulled in, but also put in PATH

      • taanegl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        This is my problem, perhaps not with nixpkgs, but nixpkgs:nixos-stableunstable. Throughout history the call to fame for distribution is not all the fancy bells and whistles, but the cohesiveness and stability of the stack - the entire stack.

        I’m not saying this is a flaw of nixpkgs, but rather a fair amount of technical debt on the of part NixOS maintainers and developers. It’s a vast movable system of modules, while being immutable at the same time. It ain’t easy. So more contribution is needed.

        I’m happy that people join and help with that. I’ll still use NixOS and nixpkgs for embedded, specialised cases, even as servers, but I’m not going to run it on a workstation. But, I’m hopeful for the future. I’d like to run it, but not yet.

        It’s not really necessary anyways, nix can run on any system… now onto my adventures of bringing nix to an immutable Fedora system without a container or VM lol