Joke's on you, I don't understand Nix and I'm a NixOS package maintainer
I'm guessing you're responsible for the documentation, as well.
Gottem lol
Kind of, but since I don't know what I'm doing I mostly just delete some of it when it's not working
is it possible to learn this power?
Randomly switch between buildInputs, nativeBuildInputs, depsBuildBuild, depsBuildTarget, depsHostHost, and depsTargetTarget until it builds.
Good luck building anything electron. Copy-paste some existing build recipe and replace the source. If it doesn't work, make a post on the forums saying it doesn't work and let somebody else figure it out, then create a PR 🫰 ezpz
I don't randomly switch between anything, I go straight to copy pasting existing packages
teach us the way
while code_is_working != true {
response = post(matrix_channel, [code, error_code]);
[code_is_working, error_code] = run(response);
}The secret is attitude, "fuck it we ball" attitude and method of "fuck around and find out" works just fine
Lol…
I mean, fair enough; also, your use case is entirely unlike that of someone who just uses NixOS normally, I would imagine. It's really not like using NixOS requires a deep understanding of the language itself, or at least that's never been my experience with it, and I've been daily driving it for well over a year at this point. As long as I know enough to keep maintaining the same /etc/nixos/configuration.nix I have now indefinitely, that's as deep of an "understanding" of the language as I will ever need, personally. I'm well aware that there are a lot of things I could be doing if I knew how to, and frankly, I'll probably never learn how to do those things because I'll probably never have to. NixOS is by far the single easiest distro I've ever used, if only because everything's always reproducible and because nothing ever breaks.
No, it's just I need niche proxy software so I maintain one package. The other package is bugged (wrong paths on nix), so I maintain a fork and a NUR package
It's not by choice!
this post implies that you download debs from the internet instead of using your distro's package manager
also last I checked apt hasn't stopped being a cli over the years
This meme reeks of someone who's only used linux for a week and has no clue what he's talking about.
When I was a beginner and used Linux Mint, I downloaded deb files, and even rpm files that I converted to deb, because I didn't know what package manager means
You can also use any of the packagekit gui's such as gnome software or kde diskover
They are both terrible. Synaptic is the only one worth using on debian based distros.
the mint gui package manager is ok
I didn't actually mean that you install deb packages from the internet, I mean debian based distros, I just don't know the acronym for it.
and AFAIK mx linux and LMDE have programs with a GUI for installing packages, and I added debian because it has a gui installer and I don't know a good third debian based distro
All power users, of all distros, use the CLI. It's what unites us!
I used the CLI a lot when I was on Windows and RISCOS before that.
I admire your dedication to posting watamote linux memes
ty
I switched to Gentoo but use the Nix package manager, helps if I wanna test out some software before committing to the compile. it's been great.
I just want to install the latest version of an app without downloading half an OS worth of dependencies. AppImage had me dreaming of this day but the project seems like it's dying, if not dead already.
Didn't appimage bundle all the dependencies inside it? That leads to way more taken disk space cuz of duplicate libs
I know this, but it's still way lighter than flatpak. (the required app depencies size <<< whatever the hell flatpak downloads)
An app image that weighs a few hundred megabytes ( it's often less) becomes several gigabytes as a flatpak. I can download more than a dozen of appimages and it still would weigh as much as a single flatpak. I think it's just that my use case require me to have a handful lightweight apps in their latest version and the rest can be managed by the OS.
Yes, the first flatpak is big cause you have to download the runtime (most common dependencies you will probably need anyways in the future). The majority of other flatpaks you will download will use the runtime you've already downloaded so those flatpaks will be lighter than the appimage variant
Flatpak nowadays feels like the spiritual successor to appimage. All the dependencies are containerized, and uninstalling an app doesn't leave behind a residue of automatically created files on your system... at least in theory. All of these benefits are kind of negated if an app has full disk read/write permission.
Appimage is kind of silly in my opinion. Appimage is just "portable application" (i.e. when an app gets shipped as a folder containing the executable, .so dependencies, and resources), but crammed into a disk image for some reason.
I was referring to flatpak when I said 'half an OS worth of dependencies'. I have an extremely shitty and unstable internet, so downloading like 5gb for a simple app isn't worth it. Even if my internet wasn't as horrible, Flatpak is only worth it when you want to install dozens of big app and not when you want to install 2-3 apps, the heaviest being a 100mb or so as a .deb.
You can technically install dpkg onto arch; but it's not reccomended.
Speaking of not recommended, you can technically install arch on an NTFS partition
You can also install Windows on btrfs
Why?
This seems cool and everything but why would you do this, just to say I can?
I have no idea, just came across it on GitHub one day and found it pretty funny. It seems to be pretty unstable though.
I can smell data loss issues just by reading this
The gentoo one is the most accurate, as I always leave it to compile overnight
What about Fedora users?
i installed nobara and while everything was simple to set up, the nobara installer doesn't recognize the ssd i flashed it on. going great
atleast arch has the AUR. right? and we have flatpak and appimage.
What's the deal with Arch/CLI/"complicated" linux distro hate? GUIs generally suck more than CLI/TUI tools. If Arch distributed an official GUI installer ISO, nobody would ever use it; the ISO would be huge compared to its current size and the archinstall TUI is the best installer I've come across so far. Just stop being afraid of the terminal.
Debian also doesn't come with a GUI package manager as far as I'm aware.
Also stop shilling Linux Mint to new users. Fedora, OpenSUSE TW, Debian, Ubuntu, and I'd even say Clear Linux are all more attractive operating systems to use for anyone who switches over. Cinnamon is just not as good as the alternatives and if you're not using Cinnamon, you might as well use Debian.
Debian also doesn’t come with a GUI package manager as far as I’m aware.
Of course it has one.
May I know why Linux Mint is that bad of an OS? For me I feel like Mint is more refined than Ubuntu (especially with how canonical is going). There's only one app center, one update manager, familiarity with windows, fast enough and has essentials pre installed (even if it is bloat for veterant Linux users).
I can accept the argument that there is no Wayland and packages are a bit behind, but for the average user, that's fine
There are a couple of issues with Mint, the biggest one by far, in my opinion, is the slow update schedule, anything more than 6 months really isn't usable for the desktop, this leads to a reliance on Flatpak and the inability to compile and use a lot of packages. The second biggest issue is Cinnamon, it's outdated, very restrictive, lacks a lot of important features, and is generally ugly (in my opinion of course) you can't even really change the default desktop since the others ones are extremely outdated in the repos. It's still ok to use but just not very compelling beyond it's similarities to Windows when compared to other distros.
I'd generally say that the non-immutable spins of Fedora are way nicer to use due to the larger repos and newer packages. You also don't really lose anything on Fedora that you'd get on Mint, you still have a GUI package manager and installer so even new users can use it intuitively.
If people didn't need Arch with GUI, distributions like EndeavourOS, Manjaro, Garuda wouldn't exist
The best CLI installer I used was from FreeBSD, the arch CLI installer didn't even run on bare metal and I'm not afraid of the terminal, I often use it to configure dot files and use programs that don't have a GUI, I just think that the lack of choice between GUI and CLI is bad
I do not want a distro with garbage pre installed, you have the choice to not use Arch, it is the "CLI choice."
I use Arch btw
Sister communities:
Community rules
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!