[Nix-dev] systemd in the long run: Revisiting How We Put Together Linux Systems (it's almost Nix...)

[Alexei Robyn]

Unless I'm missing something, Lennart's only response to you was: "we
actually try to do our homework before we propose something. We looked
at a variety of systems, and not just on Linux ones, but also what
MacOS, Android, ChromeOS, and even Windows do..."

Which - given it is completely generic and mentions none of the points
you raised (or heck, Nix itself at all) - sounds a lot more like he's
deflecting to buy time to grok Nix. I would think otherwise, but he
wrote detailed responses to almost every other poster both before and
after you... 

Hopefully if this is the case he comes back with a solid understanding
of it and not just enough of one to come up with seemingly plausible
reasons why their plan is the superior option. Past experience of people
in general tells me the latter is the more likely outcome but then I
don't know Lennart in specific. Still, here's hoping this instead
results in Nix getting some larger groups interested in it,  as well as
in this class of problems :). 

- Alexei

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014, at 05:22 PM, Luca Bruno wrote:
> On 02/09/2014 09:06, Nathan Bijnens wrote:
> > The systemd kabal just wrote a blog post detailing their long term
> > vision on Linux. They have great issue with traditional package
> > managers (who can blame them?). 
> >
> > They sketch a possible solution, based on a whole lof of BTRFS
> > subvolumes, sort of used like docker images but linked to each other
> > (it sounds as complicated as it is).
> >
> > http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html
> >
> > I have the feeling they're trying to recreate what already exists and
> > works in Nix, I have the feeling they're unaware of this little great OS.
> I've replied to G+, and Lennart also replied to me. You can find the
> discussion easily on G+. They are well aware of Nix and other systems
> such as GoboLinux or 0install and so on.
> However this is the direction in the future, more stateless and
> reproducible systems. Nix is not the perfection so I don't think yet
> another project like this will hurt. Systems are evolving through this
> path, so expect to see more and more attempts to achieve what Nix does.
> 
> Not only, they may even solve problems at kernel/system level for which
> we don't have manpower or enough marketing impact, and Nix may even take
> advantage of their work. In other words, let the system itself be more
> stateless instead of writing hacks in Nix all the way to make it work
> statelessly.
> 
> We're heading toward a new paradigm, and having new ideas on how to
> solve the same problem is about a necessity I'd say. What tool will
> survive in the end I don't know (might even be a Nix fork).
> 
> So +1 if they are really able to bring something new to table. -1 if
> they don't even solve what Nix is able to solve currently without proper
> system support. We'll see.
> 
> Best regards,
> _______________________________________________
> nix-dev mailing list
> nix-dev at lists.science.uu.nl
> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev