python-adblock VS nixpkgs

Since version 2.0.0, if the Python adblock library is available, it will be used to integrate Brave’s Rust adblocker library for improved adblocking, based on ABP-like filter lists (such as EasyList)

Ah, yup, I can reproduce with that, thanks! I opened an issue here: Loading adblock cache takes 2-4s with huge cache file · Issue #62 · ArniDagur/python-adblock

From adblock on PyPI (the Python package index):

FYI Qutebrowser is has a pretty good ad-blocker since 2.0

> Since version 2.0.0, if the Python adblock library is available, it will be used to integrate Brave’s Rust adblocker library for improved adblocking, based on ABP-like filter lists (such as EasyList). If that library is unavailable or on older versions of qutebrowser, a simpler built-in ad blocker is used instead. It takes /etc/hosts-like lists and thus is only able to block entire hosts.

You just need optional dependancy https://pypi.org/project/adblock/

How would I make adblock "available" on Windows? I found the python scripts here, but I have no clue where qutebrowser would be looking for these?

There are various solutions to this - see point 21 in the FAQ

Purely a maintenance thing - faster windows releases and not having to take care of 32-bit support for the adblock library.

You will need the (optional) adblock Python library. Once you have that installed, with the default content.blocking.method = auto setting, it'll be enabled automatically. You can also set the setting to adblock explicitly, then you'll get a warning if the library wasn't found.

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...