xmake-repo VS nixpkgs

xmake [1] gives you something like this via `xrepo env shell`.

[1] https://xrepo.xmake.io/

This project should also soon be available on xrepo, right now you can copy the headers or use the package in `package.lua` to install.

Yes, although the documentation seems bare-bones, the code looks clean.

The xmake package repository files might be useful also for people interested in making their own package manager, or even installing by hand.

Here is the package information for autoconf, for instance:

https://github.com/xmake-io/xmake-repo/blob/master/packages/...

It has download links, checksums for specific versions, and the Lua syntax seems easy to parse.

The package for NanoVG however, does not indicate anywhere that you need the GLEW and GLFW libraries:

https://github.com/xmake-io/xmake-repo/blob/master/packages/...

Therefore, if the official xmake-repo repository already provides the required package, you can use it directly without specifying the package namespace.

I written a c/c++ package manager https://xrepo.xmake.io/#/

Currently, we have included the following toolchain packages in the xmake-repo repository, allowing xmake to pull and integrate remotely:

Here's the github page for xrepo: https://github.com/xmake-io/xmake-repo

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...