postgres VS nixpkgs

EDIT: Somehow i managed to fix it right now (I struggled with this problem yesterday for hours). This github issue have helped: https://github.com/docker-library/postgres/issues/537 If anyone runs into this problem, those are crucial instructions that helped me: docker system prune docker-compose up --force-recreate --build --remove-orphans --always-recreate-deps --renew-anon-volumes

Tragedy of the commons - only need a few actors to ruin it all for us. Almost all distributors face this problem, from Docker Hub to PyPI. This also reminded me of official Postgres Docker image running a cryptominer in the background [1]

[1] - https://github.com/docker-library/postgres/issues/770

If you open the dockerfile of the desired container, you can determine exactly how and what was built. If not satisfied, you can always build your own container with the right postgresql build flags.

Ok according to The Dockerfile, postgres is running in /var/lib/postgresql/data so you will need enter the container and look at the log files in /var/lib/postgresql/data/pg_log/

I got started on trying to make a basic postgres image but I can't seem to figure out how to include a shell script in the same folder as my nix file (fetched from https://github.com/docker-library/postgres/blob/master/docker-entrypoint.sh and to be modified once I get it working) into the docker image as an entrypoint

See example here : https://github.com/docker-library/postgres/issues/601

I don't think so. The article is probably intended for the Nix community, so the author doesn't need to convince HN that something is going on. If as an outsider you are interested then you need to look into it yourself, the community has no obligation to make their internal conflicts legible to the outside world.

As an outsider myself, it certainly looks like something is going on as more than 20 Nixpkg maintainers left in a week: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues?q=label%3A%228.has%3...

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commits?author=neon-sunset

I see two signers in the top 6 displayed on https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/graphs/contributors

For a single file script, nix can make the package management quite easy: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/doc/languages-f...

For example,

```

Yes, Nix doesn't actually ensure that the builds are deterministic. In fact it works just fine if they aren't. There are packages in nixpkgs that aren't reproducible: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aiss...

I'm not familiar with Bazel, but Nix in it's current form wouldn't have solved this attack. First of all, the standard mkDerivation function calls the same configure; make; make install process that made this attack possible. Nixpkgs regularly pulls in external resources (fetchUrl and friends) that are equally vulnerable to a poisoned release tarball. Checkout the comment on the current xz entry in nixpkgs https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/tools/comp...

NixOS uses a monorepo and I think everyone's love it.

I love being able to easily grep through all the packages source code and there's regularly PRs that harmonizes conventions across many packages.

Nixpkgs doesn't include the packaged software source code, so it's a lot more practical than what Debian is doing.

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs

In this specific case, nix uses fetchFromGitHub to download the source archive, which are generated by GitHub for the specified revision[1]. Arch seems to just download the tarball from the releases page[2].

[1]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/3c2fdd0a4e6396fc310a6e...

[2]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/ib...