gzdoom VS nixpkgs

GZDoom v4.11.3 serves us as a landing area. GZDoom is one of the most popular ports of the original DOOM game. And the PVS-Studio static analyzer is our assistant.

if you do use ZDL there is a linux version over here i think that needs you to use this standalone/portable gzdoom rather than the flatpak or ZDL cant find gzdoom to launch properly.

The github release page say there is a .deb so gzdoom can definitely run on Linux, and therefore Linux mint : https://github.com/ZDoom/gzdoom/releases

To get it running on MacOS: - Download GZDoom for MacOS and double-click to extract to folder ./GZDoom.app - Google search for and download DOOM2.WAD - Right click on GZDoom app, select 'show package contents', move DOOM2.WAD to ./GZDoom.app/Contents/MacOS - Download Brutal Wolfenstein 3D, extract file ZMC-BW6.0.pk3 and move it to ./GZDoom.app folder - Drag ZMC-BW6.0.pk3 on top of GZDoom app to play, if it prompts with a list select 'Doom 2: Hell on Earth (DOOM2)' and OpenGL renderer

1) Install Linux and set it up 2) Go to zdoom.org and go to download 3) Download the Ubuntu version of ZDoom, not GZDoom 4) Click the .deb file that you have installed 5) Get an IWAD of FreeDoom or buy a copy of Doom and use that IWAD (i'll get into that later) 6) Go to your zdoom folder 7) Drag the IWAD you have installed to the folder

Just say I wanted to compile this... I have no idea where to start, apart from it being the .tar.gz file. https://github.com/ZDoom/gzdoom/releases/tag/g4.10.0

go fucking play doom zdoom.org

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...