[vog]

Naive question:

Isn't all that also true for Guix?

If so, why do your prefer Nix over Guix?

[thomastjeffery]

Guix explicitly rejects non-free software.

Unfortunately, that isn't workable for most of us.

[nextos]

Note you can use any Nix package in Guix...

[nejenendn]

Ouch. Is this at a legal or community level?

[thomastjeffery]

Community.

There may even be community-based sources for non-free packages, but they are explicitly ignored by the Guix project.

[hackermailman]

Anybody can run guix publish however and self publish their own non-free substitutes if they wanted, plus there's all the existing non-free substitute servers around, and you can try your luck with guix import from nixpkgs. The community won't help anybody if they ask for help with non-free software though.

I haven't missed any non-free packages since switching to Guix surprisingly, I always seem to find a free alternative though my daily req are pretty basic.

[thomastjeffery]

> plus there's all the existing non-free substitute servers around

Where?

> The community won't help anybody if they ask for help with non-free software though.

This, specifically, is where Nix has the advantage.

[majewsky]

Not the grandparent, but from what i can see, grandparent compares Nix with traditional package managers like dpkg or RPM, rather than Guix.

I cannot answer your question, but I think Nix has (for some reason) a lot more publicity than Guix at the moment.

[joepie91_]

Guix is derived from Nix, so that might be why.

[rekado]

If by "derived" you mean that it is another implementation of functional package management, then you are right.

But if "derived" implies that Guix is a fork, then you are mistaken.

Guix is not a fork of Nix.

[xwvvvvwx]

Guix is built on top of the nix daemon, so while it's not strictly a fork, derived seems fair.