Artyom Shalkhakov wrote: >> Hmm... Nix probably use libastral, doesn't it? Even for C/C++ programs there >> is no way to 100% automatically determine entire list of runtime >> libraries/tools needed for some particular program (consider runtime library >> opening and all non-library dependencies). > > This is not about libastral, it's about pure functions (those without > side-effects). > > Regarding "runtime library opening" (I suppose, you meant dlopen and friends), > then I suppose, you've found an exception to the rule, but maybe you are wrong. > I'm not a developer of Nix, so I can't say more. There are packages which runtime dependencies cannot be determined without looking to source code or contacting the author/looking to the home page. I maintains such a package. "dlopen" and friends is another example. Which means that "find all dependencies with no exceptions" is not true. >>> - updates and rollbacks are atomic, an update can never break >>> your system. >> This cannot be true. Consider package maintainer scripts. And, for example. >> purge of config files cannot be reverted. > > It can always be reverted if you don't "destructively update" (overwrite) files > and if you can guarantee that filenames do not clash. If edited by administrator config file was deleted, then or it cannot be reverted, or it was not purged. Most other stuff can be reverted in theory... but again, Debian package maintainer scripts don't support downgrading (in general), and there are reasons for it. >> It has nothing to do with our apt infrastructure, it doesn't >> understand it and invented its own wheel. I think no way for Nix in Debian. We >> have excellent dpkg, we have not-so-excellent, but rather good apt, and >> significant amount of Debian users choose Debian just only because of apt. IMO. > > I'm not interested in your opinion if it isn't backed by facts, One big fact is: Debian have tens (or even hundreds) of tools that use apt infrastructure, including both user side and archive maintenance side. Nix, in any way it operates, suggests other API to maintain packages. Who is supposed to rewrite all this stuff for Nix? > It looks like you completely misunderstood the idea, so lurk before > you post. Thanks. Yes, you are probably right: I don't understand how Nix may be useful for Debian (and for GNU/Linux also). -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com Ukrainian C++ Developer, Debian Maintainer, APT contributor
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature