getopt VS nixpkgs

Between -std=c99 and removing these headers, you're missing time definitions (struct timeval, gettimeofday) and option parsing definitions (struct option, getopt_long). Mingw-w64 provides all this for compatibility, but MSVC has none of these, so you'll need to write replacements. I've written embeddable, public domain implementations of getopt and something like getopt_long, in case that helps. These are how I deal with option parsing portability.

The option parser is crude and doesn't follow conventions. Particularly the lack of -- support (disables option parsing) would make it impossible to use safely in scripts. If you don't want to use the system or toolchain-provided getopt, here's a public domain, embeddable implementation: getopt.h

On unix-like systems there's a getopt function for parsing short options. Mingw-w64 has one as well, to cover Windows programs. If I care about portability, I just embed my own so it not only works everywhere, it behave the same everywhere, too.

https://github.com/skeeto/getopt/blob/master/getopt.h (short)

Not only the GNU, you have an example in this thread where someone suggested to use or roll something similar to https://github.com/skeeto/getopt/blob/master/getopt.h, which, surprise, depends on strchr, a function that solves a much trivial problem than POSIX getopt, to begin with.

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...