ripgrep-all VS nixpkgs

I searched in portage, and it seems there is another version working also with other documents like PDFs and doc.

https://github.com/phiresky/ripgrep-all

If you want even faster search across different formats, you can try ripgrep-all ( https://github.com/phiresky/ripgrep-all ). It can search across epub, docx, pdf, zip, mp4 etc. If you are handy with the tool, you can write custom adaptor to search across images using OCR with tesseract.

1. If you want better adoption especially among corporations, GPL-3 wont cut it. Maybe think of some business friendly licenses (MIT etc)

2. I understand the excitement about llm's. But how about making something more accessible. I use rip-grep-all (rga) along with fzf [1] that can search all files including pdfs in a specific folders. However, I would like a GUI tool to search across multiple folders, provide priority of results across folders and store and search histories where I can do a meta-search. This is sufficient for 95% of my usecases to search locally and I dont need LLM. If khoj can enable such search as default without LLM that will be a gamechanger for many people without a heavy compute machine or who dont want to use OpenAI.

[1] https://github.com/phiresky/ripgrep-all/wiki/fzf-Integration

I use `rga` to search through multiple PDF files for work. The tool returns a list of files and I would like to make those file paths clickable.

rga, aka ripgrep-all

I wanted to say 'au contrer' to your 'screenshots are not searchable' and link this[0] but I don't actually see images in the readme.. I swear it was there, maybe it's a buried extra flag..

[0] https://github.com/phiresky/ripgrep-all

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.