nixpkgs VS nixos-search

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...

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.

For me, https://search.nixos.org/ is a better aid than the wiki. Often the right keyword in the NixOS packages or modules search will lead me right to the obvious and simple answer that I couldn't find elsewhere.

Does https://search.nixos.org/ pull from nixpkgs, the Nix User Repository, or both?

Just go to search.nixos.org, open the option you would like to see more of, and click on the link behind "Declared in".

I've done a nix-env query, and checked in https://search.nixos.org but can't seem to find any SAR package, nor any google search that gave any hints to see if it might be part of another system utility package...

If you want to install a package, search for it at https://search.nixos.org

The gnome system monitor is gnome.gnome-system-monitor for example https://search.nixos.org/packages?channel=23.05&show=gnome.g...

search.nixos.org also includes flakes that people PR into the index via GitHub at https://github.com/NixOS/nixos-search/issues

ps: $ nix search exists via experimental flags https://nixos.org/manual/nix/stable/command-ref/new-cli/nix3...

Idk about ec_sys, I couldn't find it on search.nixos.org, but since it's a kernel module it might just come with the kernel idk.

I rarely think to look at flakes by their source, actually. I have a Nixpkgs clone that I jump into for anything super ad-hoc but most of the time I'm just doing REPL, :lf ./. and mashing tab-completion. That's usually to make sure the thing I'm after exists in one of the large package sets like node, vimPlugins, or similar, and that I got the name right - which could probably be answered just as easily with https://search.nixos.org/ .

search.nixos.org