Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-28 Thread Bjørn Forsman 
On 28 February 2016 at 15:28, Bjørn Forsman  wrote:
> On 28 February 2016 at 15:07, Vladimír Čunát  wrote:
>> On 02/28/2016 02:59 PM, Bjørn Forsman wrote:
>> Fetching expressions is something else than the author wants.
>> Third-party binary packages for nix can be provided, and we have those
>> one-click installs for that. Of course one would have to have some
>> package manager on the system already (Nix in this case), which is
>> considered a large disadvantage by them.
>
> Oh, I didn't know that one-click installer packages could be made by
> third parties. I'll read the manpage now.

I looked at "man nix-install-package" and the One-click installation
section in the NixOS manual,
http://nixos.org/nix/manual/#sec-nix-install-package. Neither source
made me understand how to _create_ a .nixpkg file. The manual
described the internals of the .nixpkg file though. If one would have
to install Hydra to build .nixpkg files(?), not good.

I think it should be as simple as:

  nix create-nixpkgs myapp   # myapp is an attribute referring to a derivation

Then upload the resulting .nixpkg to a webserver.

Unfortunately, I don't have skills nor time to implement that.

BTW, nix-install-package manpage refers to "manifests". Didn't nix
deprecate manifests some time ago?

Best regards,
Bjørn Forsman
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-28 Thread Bjørn Forsman 
On 28 February 2016 at 15:07, Vladimír Čunát  wrote:
> On 02/28/2016 02:59 PM, Bjørn Forsman wrote:
>> On 28 February 2016 at 14:19, Domen Kožar  wrote:
>>> For your reading pleasue
>>> https://github.com/probonopd/AppImageKit/wiki/Similar-projects#nix
>>
>> Seems we need to (1) package Subsurface and (2) implement recursive
>> Nix(?) so that expressions can be fetched from upstream repos
>> directly.
>
> Fetching expressions is something else than the author wants.
> Third-party binary packages for nix can be provided, and we have those
> one-click installs for that. Of course one would have to have some
> package manager on the system already (Nix in this case), which is
> considered a large disadvantage by them.

I guess we cannot please everyone.

Oh, I didn't know that one-click installer packages could be made by
third parties. I'll read the manpage now.

> BTW, I tried their Chromium AppImages and without success, at least on
> NixOS. So much for running on any Linux.
> $ /some/path/Chromium-50.0.2644.0-x86_64.AppImage
> -bash: /some/path/Chromium-50.0.2644.0-x86_64.AppImage: No such file or
> directory

I experienced similar thing with Pitivi "universal" package installer.
It has everything bundled *except* the linker. (I wonder how 0install
handles the linker.)

Best regards,
Bjørn Forsman
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-28 Thread Vladimír Čunát 
On 02/28/2016 02:59 PM, Bjørn Forsman wrote:
> On 28 February 2016 at 14:19, Domen Kožar  wrote:
>> For your reading pleasue
>> https://github.com/probonopd/AppImageKit/wiki/Similar-projects#nix
> 
> Seems we need to (1) package Subsurface and (2) implement recursive
> Nix(?) so that expressions can be fetched from upstream repos
> directly.

Fetching expressions is something else than the author wants.
Third-party binary packages for nix can be provided, and we have those
one-click installs for that. Of course one would have to have some
package manager on the system already (Nix in this case), which is
considered a large disadvantage by them.

BTW, I tried their Chromium AppImages and without success, at least on
NixOS. So much for running on any Linux.
$ /some/path/Chromium-50.0.2644.0-x86_64.AppImage
-bash: /some/path/Chromium-50.0.2644.0-x86_64.AppImage: No such file or
directory


--Vladimir




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-28 Thread Bjørn Forsman 
On 28 February 2016 at 14:19, Domen Kožar  wrote:
> For your reading pleasue
> https://github.com/probonopd/AppImageKit/wiki/Similar-projects#nix

Seems we need to (1) package Subsurface and (2) implement recursive
Nix(?) so that expressions can be fetched from upstream repos
directly.

IMHO, a central repository works for most but not all of packaging
needs. Leaf programs can probably better be dealt with directly with
upstream.

Best regards,
Bjørn Forsman
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-28 Thread Domen Kožar 
For your reading pleasue
https://github.com/probonopd/AppImageKit/wiki/Similar-projects#nix

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Vladimír Čunát  wrote:

> On 02/27/2016 11:33 PM, Eelco Dolstra wrote:
> > On 27/02/16 15:28, Vladimír Čunát wrote:
> >> The aims seem significantly different. Appimage and many others
> >> evidently focus on creating bundles that "just work" everywhere. That
> >> was never among the (main) objectives of Nix, although you can make it
> >> create similar bundles.
> >
> > Actually it was. It's certainly a goal that a Nix package works on any
> Linux
> > distribution.
>
> Ah, I got a little carried away, and moreover made a claim without
> having evidence to support it.
>
> --Vladimir
>
>
>
> ___
> nix-dev mailing list
> nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
>
>
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-28 Thread Vladimír Čunát 
On 02/27/2016 11:33 PM, Eelco Dolstra wrote:
> On 27/02/16 15:28, Vladimír Čunát wrote:
>> The aims seem significantly different. Appimage and many others
>> evidently focus on creating bundles that "just work" everywhere. That
>> was never among the (main) objectives of Nix, although you can make it
>> create similar bundles.
> 
> Actually it was. It's certainly a goal that a Nix package works on any Linux
> distribution.

Ah, I got a little carried away, and moreover made a claim without
having evidence to support it.

--Vladimir




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-27 Thread Eelco Dolstra 
Hi,

On 27/02/16 15:28, Vladimír Čunát wrote:

> On 02/27/2016 03:00 PM, Kevin Cox wrote:
>> So while I think it is cool that it is simply a binary you can run you
>> obviously lose out on the efficiency of Nix.
> 
> The aims seem significantly different. Appimage and many others
> evidently focus on creating bundles that "just work" everywhere. That
> was never among the (main) objectives of Nix, although you can make it
> create similar bundles.

Actually it was. It's certainly a goal that a Nix package works on any Linux
distribution.

-- 
Eelco Dolstra | LogicBlox, Inc. | http://nixos.org/~eelco/
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-27 Thread Vladimír Čunát 
On 02/27/2016 10:45 PM, Mateusz Czaplinski wrote:
> (though Nix in theory can be used userspace-only
> too at the cost of full recompilations, right?)

Some reported to successfully use nix on machines without any root
access and without recompilation, thanks to the proot tool.




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-27 Thread Mateusz Czaplinski 
Personally, after seeing the articles I also thought about Nix and how
they relate, but after some time I too now think they're rather
complementary, serving quite different needs and with different pros &
cons. Specifically, what I value very highly in Nix is the declarative
specification and ease of upgrading + downgrading. OTOH, as of now the
AppImage model seems easier for casual end-users, and for
userspace-only deployments, while NixOS is more of a
"total-conversion'' (though Nix in theory can be used userspace-only
too at the cost of full recompilations, right?). Also, as to Nix, I'm
quite excited by a potential perspective of maybe using it some day on
Windows too, as well as other platforms (esp. Genode).

/Mateusz.

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Anand Patil
 wrote:
> Having only read the front page, it looks like it could be complementary to
> Nix. You could develop and build in Nix for reproducibility, efficiency and
> completeness. Then, for portable deployment, you could run nix2appimage or
> else include AppImageKit in a derivation and write the AppImage to $out. It
> would be like using Nix to build a statically linked binary or a Docker
> image.
>
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 9:29 AM Vladimír Čunát  wrote:
>>
>> On 02/27/2016 03:00 PM, Kevin Cox wrote:
>> > So while I think it is cool that it is simply a binary you can run you
>> > obviously lose out on the efficiency of Nix.
>>
>> The aims seem significantly different. Appimage and many others
>> evidently focus on creating bundles that "just work" everywhere. That
>> was never among the (main) objectives of Nix, although you can make it
>> create similar bundles.
>>
>> --Vladimir
>>
>>
>> ___
>> nix-dev mailing list
>> nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
>> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
>
>
> ___
> nix-dev mailing list
> nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
>
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-27 Thread Anand Patil 
Having only read the front page, it looks like it could be complementary to
Nix. You could develop and build in Nix for reproducibility, efficiency and
completeness. Then, for portable deployment, you could run nix2appimage or
else include AppImageKit in a derivation and write the AppImage to $out. It
would be like using Nix to build a statically linked binary or a Docker
image.

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 9:29 AM Vladimír Čunát  wrote:

> On 02/27/2016 03:00 PM, Kevin Cox wrote:
> > So while I think it is cool that it is simply a binary you can run you
> > obviously lose out on the efficiency of Nix.
>
> The aims seem significantly different. Appimage and many others
> evidently focus on creating bundles that "just work" everywhere. That
> was never among the (main) objectives of Nix, although you can make it
> create similar bundles.
>
> --Vladimir
>
>
> ___
> nix-dev mailing list
> nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
>
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-27 Thread Vladimír Čunát 
On 02/27/2016 03:00 PM, Kevin Cox wrote:
> So while I think it is cool that it is simply a binary you can run you
> obviously lose out on the efficiency of Nix.

The aims seem significantly different. Appimage and many others
evidently focus on creating bundles that "just work" everywhere. That
was never among the (main) objectives of Nix, although you can make it
create similar bundles.

--Vladimir




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-27 Thread Kevin Cox 
Well the key differences I see are:

Nix:
- Dependencies are shared, less disk space and better cache usage.
- Requires software on the system to manage the programs.

AppImage:
- Dependencies are bundled.
- Everything comes in a "standard" ELF executable so it can run anywhere
(provided a compatible kernel and that you have linked in enough libs)

So while I think it is cool that it is simply a binary you can run you
obviously lose out on the efficiency of Nix.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Re: [Nix-dev] AppImage

2016-02-27 Thread Vladimír Čunát 
On 02/27/2016 02:31 PM, Yacine Hmito wrote:
> Tell me what you think.

I only had a very brief look now, but the steps described in [3] seem to
indicate that the packages aren't as self-contained as one might hope.
(Formulations like: add everything that might be missing on your target
OS :-)

[3] https://github.com/probonopd/AppImageKit/wiki/Creating-AppImages

Note that there are quite a few other systems with overlaps in aims or
techniques. From the top of my head: Xdg-app, or even side-by-side
assemblies from Microsoft.

--Vladimir




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev