relocatable.nix VS nixpkgs

- the caching works across branches, so for example merging a feature branch to master, if nothing changes the build on master will be very quick

I created something similar to nix-cache for gitlab, but I had to create a dedicated runner running NixOS.

If I could use NixOS for deployment, at that point I would just point the same binary cache to the machine and use the same derivation to build the app. Because the app was already build by CI, it would just download the compiled version. No need for artifactory or similar. In that scenario (you using poetry) you probably would just use poetry2nix to generate the application.

If the OS is not NixOS, but you still want to deploy via nix, then IMO this[2] looks interesting, basically it packages everything in self extracting archive. That you can extract and then run the app.

Other alternatives are these bundlers[3], which includes building toArx (works in a way similar to the previous one but pretends everything is in a single file), RPM, DEB, docker (you would have more control over it if you would use the code directly instead of a bundler though)

And the last option (probably the most obvious one) is that you can simply just use the tool to build the package. Since you're using poetry, then you can generate a wheel from it.

[1] https://github.com/takeda/nix-cde/blob/master/contrib/gitlab...

[2] https://github.com/Ninlives/relocatable.nix

[3] https://github.com/NixOS/bundlers/blob/master/flake.nix

This will drop you into a shell where `tracexec` is installed.

[1]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/310158

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