Re: Adoption of Nix?
Hello.
While I was writing, Josselin Mouette said almost all I wanted to say,
but I'll add a little :)
2008/12/24 Artyom Shalkhakov <artyom.shalkhakov@gmail.com>:
>>> The claims that I think are valuable are:
>>> - *all* dependencies of a package are automatically found by Nix,
>>> no exceptions,
>> 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).
Well, as I see, it uses it's own package format, which is
wrapper-description around everything - source, deb or rpm. Does it
really have any sense? We have our deb and src packages, do we really
need any wrappers, that make us possible to install rpms? For what
purposes? Surely, dpkg always allows you to rollback any installed
packages. You just sometimes have to rollback half of all your
packages - in accordance with dependencies.
I've just looked to the structure of that package format - it also
requires to write dependencies - so what in it deals with 'em better?
I really don't understand. Can it work with sections like "Recommends"
or "Suggests"?
And, of course, for the 2-3 versions of each package will make debian
security team curse you for ages. Consider it :)
--
Best wishes,
Velichko Vsevolod
Reply to: