nut VS nixpkgs

> what software do you recommend for gnu/linux to take input from the UPS to tell the laptop to shutdown?

https://networkupstools.org/

The Synology software is based on N.U.T. https://networkupstools.org and the Plus 1100 (listed on NUT as the Easy Power 1200) is supported in the native package with the 'blazer' driver. If you have the skills, I would SSH into the NAS and see if the device is 'noticed' or better yet recognised by the USB sub-system when you plug it it. (Normal Linux would use the lsusb command to see devices but I have no NAS handy to see if this is valid on the Synology)

Others have answered the hardware part of your question. I have not seen much mention about the software to control graceful shutdowns. For this I suggest you look at the ”Network UPS Tool” (NUT for short) project (https://networkupstools.org/). It is mostly manufacturer agnostic with clients for a vast array of hardware components.

You're looking for NUT.

Network UPS Tools is one option: https://networkupstools.org/

APC is giving me pre-nut clarity.

So no, the NAS does not monitor the battery level. The UPS does that. The NAS just acts on the messages it receives from the UPS via Synology's version of NUT - Network UPS Tools (https://networkupstools.org/). The NAS will first receive the ON_BATTERY/POWERFAIL signal. Then, eventually the BATTERY_LOW signal at which time the UPS will shutdown. So you really need to set a time for it to shut down *BEFORE* you get BATTERY_LOW.

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...