homebrew-emacsmacport VS nixpkgs

Run emacs -q (no add-ons loaded) and it should be a lot faster than VS Code. Which means that a library you loaded is the culprit. Things like Doom Emacs are notorious for unexpected slowness since they're not very well put together and load questionable libraries.

In the unlikely case where emacs -q is still slow, use Emacs Mac Port (https://github.com/railwaycat/homebrew-emacsmacport/releases...).

This is at least 2x perceivably faster than VS Code on Mac.

Important note: I learned that apparently not all Emacsen properly support :stipple (despite happily accepting it as a face attribute). Linux/UNIX is safe, emacs-mac supports it on MacOS, but Windows may not at all (untested). Also, terminal emacs does not (to my knowledge) implement :stipple. Let me know how you fare. Update: Pure GTK emacs apparently does display stipples, but incorrectly (as an inverse mask).

I don't use macOS anymore, but the best port I found for speed was https://github.com/railwaycat/homebrew-emacsmacport

There is the code to do just that. Works with emacs-mac and emacs-plus.

There's the "Mac" version, from Mitsuharu Yamamoto or railwaycat. The Mac port works more like Mac than the NextStep port. And it looks like the Mac port does work with C-f4.

Homebrew

You can install emacs-mac by homebrew (see https://github.com/railwaycat/homebrew-emacsmacport). $ brew tap railwaycat/emacsmacport $ brew install emacs-mac This emacs contains mac-win.el. Mac Auto ASCII mode in the mac-win.el automatically selects the most-recently-used ASCII-capable keyboard input source on some occasions: after prefix key (bound in the global keymap) press such as C-x and M-g, and at the start of minibuffer input. This function is very useful. I guess you can read Japanese, please visit Japanese setup page of my website (https://taipapamotohus.com/post/japanese\_setup/).

For what it's worth, the emacs-mac port provides a mac-effective-appearance-change-hook hook to do the same thing as the System appearance change plugin. I use it like this:

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...

True, but irrelevant -- _some packages_, _somewhere_, do depend on xz, which, if built, requires pulling the source from GitHub (see the default.nix: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/nixos-23.11/pkgs/tools...)

It's not the vulnerability that's a problem right now (NixOS was protected by a couple of factors) but rather GitHub's hamfisted response.

That is the problem.

We’ve noticed that some users have been asking about how to use older versions of Terraform in their Nix setups [1, 2]. This is an example of the diverse needs of people and the importance of maintaining backward compatibility. We hope that nixpkgs-terraform will be a useful tool for these users.

I think whateveracct was referring to is this link:

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/developmen...

What that file is doing, is building a package, and it essentially is a combination of what Makefile and what RPM spec file does.

I don't know if you're familiar with those tools, but if you aren't it takes some time to know them enough to understand what is happening. So why would be different here?

#!/usr/bin/env nix-shell #! nix-shell -i bash #! nix-shell -p sops #! nix-shell -I https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/archive/refs/tags/23.05.tar.gz source config.sh "$@"