Vancouver, BC, Canada

  • 0 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 7th, 2023

help-circle


  • These comments really speak to me as someone who is comfortable in Arch but mildly interested in NixOS. The concept seems great, and it seems to work very smoothly when it works. Yet there are always these war stories where people have had to fight the system, to debug some misbehaving hack that is nonetheless required to smash a particular package into the NixOS mould. It is discouraging. The idea I get is that NixOS involves more time doing OS curation chores than does Arch, which already hits the limit of my willingness.

    Flakes are another issue. The pre-flakes way seems to be de-facto deprecated, yet the new, flaky way is experimental. I don’t want to waste time learning a doomed paradigm, and I don’t want to depend on anything experimental.

    For me, configuration files in git plus btrfs snapshots is just so straightforward. I want to see NixOS as a better way, but I can’t.














  • 601error@lemmy.catoLinux@lemmy.mlMicrosoft Edge, anyone?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    As a PowerShell expert, I can confirm it is suuuper verbose and yet cryptic. It’s a real shell, much better than it’s predecessor, but still with plenty of bad decisions in its design and implementation. My theory is that they only watched a 1-hour presentation on Bash before spending a weekend designing PowerShell.




  • 601error@lemmy.catoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    As someone who has mucked about inside the PowerShell code a bunch, it’s a mess. It looks like clean OO design on the surface, but once you dig in, you find it’s actually a fairly tightly-coupled tangle of spaghetti. It gets the job done, I guess, but it’s not enjoyable to hack on.