In reply to @mickeymarse:4d2.org
I've installed NixOS at some point last year influenced by someone I follow. Their installation included flakes. Since then, I've read so many things about flakes having been experimental for ages as well as controversial.
What's the general take within the Lix community? Would I just be better off?

warning: 'NIX_SSL_CERT_FILE' is an impure environment variable of this derivation but a *DIFFERENT* `ssl-cert-file` was set in the settings which takes precedence.
If you use `ssl-cert-file`, the certificate gets copied in the builder environment and the environment variables are set automatically.
If you set this environment variable to be an impure environment variable, you need to ensure it is accessible to the sandbox via `extra-sandbox-paths`.
This warning may become a hard error in the future version of Lix.

I keep seeing this during builds and have absolutely zero clue where it would be getting set in the first place.

could my forgejo username be made to match the identity.lix.systems username?

oliviafloof -> holly

Upon further investigation, this is a lix-only bug

The cppnix pipe-operators implementation doesn’t break docs for lib.trivial.pipe, but the lix implementation does

I’m guessing there’s a name collision between lib.pipe and the pipe operators because Value::isPrimOp() is true

But this is my first time diving into the nix code and I don’t really understand

In reply to @sofiedotcafe:matrix.org
what if they don't expose such

In reply to @coca162:matrix.org
You can also take a look at https://nilla.dev/ as well for this

Looks neat! Although I kinda agree, so much as I personally dislike Flakes, would backwards compatibility be crucial for its success, I think.

Thanks for showing us this!

In reply to @delroth:delroth.net
(this discussion is imo precisely why flakes has won and why (again, imo) any flakes alternative without explicit compatibility support for flakes is doomed to fail)