Michael Raskin <[email protected]> writes: >>>>Calculating the transitive closure for all nixos modules / services run by >>>>systemd is one way to prioritize. A populatiry contest could be added to >>>>that. >>> >>> Maybe having a channel which is a subset of the main channel and >>> includes at least ssh, apache, nginx, postgresql, mysql, and some ftp >>> server would be a nice start? >> >>How are people supposed to use that channel? >>I don't think I can _add_ a secondary channel which provides a >>conflicting source (nixos). Switching back and forth doesn't sound >>easy. >> >>Also, this would just make your system start to build all the additional >>packages (not built by this new channel) by itself. No matter how much >>stuff gets pre-built, a channel always contains a specific nixpkgs >>version, so with or without binary archives, a nixos-rebuild _will_ >>build everything for that release. > > This will be a channel for server systems. You will checkout master and > do a rebuild, and this channel would provide you with prebuilt packages > for most of your server needs.
So server systems need to start following a channel that does not run lengthy tests? And I think people don't usually use local git repos on their servers. The nixpkgs/nixos tree gets provided by the channel. I just want to run `nix-channel --update && nixos-rebuild switch` on my server. Not supply it with a local git checkout that I need to keep up to date and do custom rebuilds against. I do see what you are aiming for, but I don't think there's a clean way to combine it with the default workflow (nicely tested channel which provides nixpkgs/nixos sources and binaries). If there's a way to be able to add _both_ channels, this would be great. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
