Nix Flakes | 890 Members | |
| 179 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 15 Dec 2023 | ||
In reply to @janik0:matrix.orgThanks! I'll check them out. | 14:43:23 | |
| 16 Dec 2023 | ||
In reply to @themountainking:matrix.orgWhat do you find better about flatpaks over nix installed and isolated profiles? Please don't take this as an attack - I just don't quite see the appeal and am genuinely curious. | 13:08:55 | |
| 19 Dec 2023 | ||
| 07:08:56 | ||
| 16:48:09 | ||
| 20 Dec 2023 | ||
| 20:38:38 | ||
| 21 Dec 2023 | ||
| 10:16:15 | ||
| 23 Dec 2023 | ||
In reply to @bryan.bennett:matrix.orgCould be, because I am still new to nixos. Don't know what isolated profiles are. Aside from that the appeal of flatpaks for me are that software sources are often directly published and maintained there. With flatpaks you'll often get the most up to date versions as soon as they are released. | 12:49:26 | |
In reply to @bryan.bennett:matrix.orgCould you please explain why your way is more beneficial? I'd like to understand your viewpoint. | 12:50:42 | |
| flatpaks are good for encapsulation. They have a concept called runtime that are a standard set of libraries that your application builds against. But note that all of this means that your own application or library cannot be re-used by others, they have to build/bundle/distribute it because it is not a part of the blessed "runtime". In Nix there is no blessed runtime, even the dynamic linker. So we take that concept to the extreme to the point where anything you build/distribute can be reused/shared, and won't conflict with anything else either. So if you only have a concern of distributing one application, flatpak might be a better choice. Nix has made a different set of tradeoffs. profiles allow you to group together several packages into a single directory tree. | 22:07:24 | |
| 24 Dec 2023 | ||
| 10:06:36 | ||
| 18:12:55 | ||
| 21:18:00 | ||
| 25 Dec 2023 | ||
| 23:48:32 | ||
| 26 Dec 2023 | ||
| 13:11:34 | ||
| 17:34:32 | ||
| 18:06:47 | ||
| 18:39:00 | ||
| 27 Dec 2023 | ||
| 15:36:07 | ||
| 15:37:31 | ||
| 28 Dec 2023 | ||
| 18:08:50 | ||
| 30 Dec 2023 | ||
| 10:47:32 | ||
| 11:48:21 | ||
| 22:04:29 | ||
| 23:29:45 | ||
| 31 Dec 2023 | ||
| 18:10:50 | ||
| 21:07:59 | ||
| 1 Jan 2024 | ||
| 02:20:14 | ||
| 2 Jan 2024 | ||
| 16:34:11 | ||
| 3 Jan 2024 | ||
In reply to @themountainking:matrix.org I'm sorry - I missed this. I am not so worried about application distribution as consumption and profiles with a declarative source and reusable dependencies seem preferable there. Distributors have different priorities (even leading some to recently only support shipping their applications as flatpaks!, but the idea that the consumer must accept what the distributor gives them is toxic and limiting. I'm happy to have alternatives and willing to learn from flatpaks - I just see their "realm" as slightly more limited than nix's (though nix's does have limitations and shortcomings as well) | 17:50:11 | |
| 4 Jan 2024 | ||
| 14:54:55 | ||