|
|
|
|
|
by chaorace
1988 days ago
|
|
It was simply too difficult for me to do that. I learned the language, built derivations, then realized it was just way too much work for what I wanted. I like what Nix brings to the table, but, ultimately, I was perfectly happy to compromise the bullet-proof integrity of nix for the simplicity of pacman + aconfmgr. It's the perfect blend for use on my own daily drivers. With that being said, I would use NixOS over arch + aconfmgr 10 out of 10 times in a production DevOps environment. What time/effort you give up in terms of instant usability is immediately recovered when you start working in terms of modular and widespread system deployment. |
|
After that experience, I'd actually hesitate to use NixOS in a production environment. The main problem is Nix and the library functions themselves are incredibly obtuse. It also doesn't help that it's a dynamic functional language, so everything just looks like magic when you're first using it. I think most engineers would really struggle with it. I'd be more comfortable introducing Haskell - I think it's easier to learn and understand!