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
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
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
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
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
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
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 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
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
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
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
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
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]
Hi,
I just stumbled on the AppImage website[1] on reddit.
The github README[2] that roughly explains how it works show some overlap
with how Nix organizes the internals of a derivation in the store.
I'm sending you this because you might find it interesting and I would be
glad to hear your
14 matches
Mail list logo