β² 235 βΌ I'm sorry (lemmy.zip) submitted 1 week ago by Mistiygirl@lemmy.zip to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world 62 comments fedilink hide all child comments I use Arch btw
[β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 4 points 1 week ago (4 children) It sounds like it's work for the sake of work. Anybody I ask about the benefits of nix can't really say anything apart from reproducibility and quickly spinning up your system again if you need to. Those things aren't really problems that need solving, in my opinion. They already have goods solutions. Especially ones that are simpler than nix π I use Arch btw. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [β] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca [S] 13 points 1 week ago For me I like iterating on my home lab so itβs nice knowing I 100% did not forget that I left some port open or service running, itβs all nicely defined in a configuration module I set up. Thereβs a low chance Iβm going to reuse my configs, but itβs nice I have the option. Probably the biggest value is itβs all written down nicely in a structured and documented system instead of my old sub folders of just/makefiles and bash scripts andβs inlined configuration. Then thereβs also nice stuff: my config also defines a dashboard for checking the status of my services (when I add a new service, it regenerates as the service is added automatically), I can see which users I created to run in containers, i can experiment with a new desktop environment and just comment out a block to go back. permalink fedilink source parent [β] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com [S] 10 points 1 week ago* (1 child) Documented declarative centralized configuration of all my systems; that value can't be overstated. Then the fact that I can run any version of any nix package from anywhere at any time with a single terminal command, the ability to effortlessly and cleanly switch desktop environments with completely no friction or fear, to be able to roll back by booting into any previous configuration still on disk, or entirely rebuild any older configuration I've tracked in git, Painless and fearless updates with a rolling release, very little chance of borking and I can never get out of step; doesn't matter if I update once an hour or once a year, I can share my settings with friends e.g. they can try out my MPV config with a single nix command, or consume my flake outputs and add it to their system with merge/overriding changes, I can clearly version system dependencies for everything that needs them without shipping containers, I can define development shell environments which is basically like python venvs with requires profiles but for every language, I can remotely provision a machine, including disk partitioning and luks and initrd ssh, with a single command, There's a plethora of modules that make setting up complex services with sensible defaults as simple as "enable = true;", ... I could probably go on for a while but yeah permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 3 points 1 week ago* (2 children) I guess it's all down to use cases, eh. I have no use for most of that, so using nix makes no sense for me. And the things that I do do/use in that list, it's just as easy to do without nix, if not easier, such as changing the desktop environment/compositor e.g. Just edit my login shell's config file on a single line, usually. Stuff like that. π No need to learn a whole ass language for that, or learn a new domain language. I like to keep it simple when I can. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [β] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com [S] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) Definitely. It's totally not the right thing for everyone But coming from windows, I remember the first time I wanted to switch from gnome to kde on arch resulted in a week of pain before just reinstalling... As someone who's very forgetful, I also tried to write scripts to automate the changes I make on new systems, and remember what weird fixes I applied, where, and why; would usually end in disaster because of how fragile I felt everything was. I tried freebsd, debian, ubuntu, arch, manjaro, mint, even backtrack5 way back when. None of them stuck for one reason or another. NixOS is the first distro I've used long-term as a daily driver, and I'm pretty convinced it will be the only distro I use going forward (in one form or another). And regarding my point about update frequency, I mention that also because of my experience with arch. Everything is user-error. Reminds me of the straight to jail meme. Update too fast? Borked. Update too slow? Believe it or not, also borked. Update without reading the forum? Straight to borked. Not so much a problem for me now. But again, totally not for everyone. The vast majority even. But it jives with whatever part of whatever spectrums I'm on. permalink fedilink source parent [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 1 week ago* (1 child) Here's how you install Gnome in nixos services.desktopManager.gnome.enable = true; Here's how you also install gdm services.displayManager.gdm.enable = true; permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago And on Arch: doas pacman -S gnome gdm π permalink fedilink source parent [β] Martineski@lemmy.dbzer0.com [S] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) I like having the same system configuration across machines and be sure that everything is the same. I like having all configuration in one place and have comments near the relevant code for extra clarity. Nixos makes setting up root on ZFS a breeze. System as nix configuration makes it very easy to track changes with version control and informative commits. If I fuck up the system I can easily boot into older generation. System can rebuild only if everything (with proper checks) succeeds giving you a greater confidence in things working. System reinstals are quick and easy so on hardware failure you can go back to work very quickly without having go spend days and weeks getting your system so vagualy similar state as before. Nixos made it easy for me to set up mirrored boot so my system will still work fine when one of my boot drives fails. I get to know what is actually installed on my devices and can easily get rid of it. No dependency hell. I can easily try out a program before installing it permanently with nix shell. Impermanence helps me ensure that every folder and file that I need to keep is documented and keeps them in one place for very easy backups and I have 100% confidence at my backups have everything important. And many other bigger and smaller things that I can't remember right now. I'd honestly be interested in solutions simpler than nix providing the same or greater benefits with more simplicity. E: Also, because my original comment wasn't well worded I will mention that I meant that once you learn how to work with nixos things become easier and once you get the setup going it's just there continuing to work since the effort is paid in advance and you continue getting the benefits just like that. permalink fedilink source parent [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child) It's about remembering that you did. I have no idea what changes I've made to my ancient Ubuntu box so if an upgrade borks my system again I'm SOL Also, a Nix upgrade won't break your system, unlike Ubuntu permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child) Yeah, better to use Arch or nix to avoid system breakage π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child) Nix, yes, because it has rollbacks permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child) If you need rollbacks, of course. I don't. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child) You need them like you need fire extinguishers My Ubuntu LTS upgrade failed. Would have killed for a rollback permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 6 days ago (1 child) You need fire extinguishers if you have something worth saving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Sometimes I just want to roll back one piece of software. Try doing that with flatpak permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Wouldn't flatpak uninstall do that? Or what do you mean "roll back" in this case? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca [S] 13 points 1 week ago For me I like iterating on my home lab so itβs nice knowing I 100% did not forget that I left some port open or service running, itβs all nicely defined in a configuration module I set up. Thereβs a low chance Iβm going to reuse my configs, but itβs nice I have the option. Probably the biggest value is itβs all written down nicely in a structured and documented system instead of my old sub folders of just/makefiles and bash scripts andβs inlined configuration. Then thereβs also nice stuff: my config also defines a dashboard for checking the status of my services (when I add a new service, it regenerates as the service is added automatically), I can see which users I created to run in containers, i can experiment with a new desktop environment and just comment out a block to go back. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com [S] 10 points 1 week ago* (1 child) Documented declarative centralized configuration of all my systems; that value can't be overstated. Then the fact that I can run any version of any nix package from anywhere at any time with a single terminal command, the ability to effortlessly and cleanly switch desktop environments with completely no friction or fear, to be able to roll back by booting into any previous configuration still on disk, or entirely rebuild any older configuration I've tracked in git, Painless and fearless updates with a rolling release, very little chance of borking and I can never get out of step; doesn't matter if I update once an hour or once a year, I can share my settings with friends e.g. they can try out my MPV config with a single nix command, or consume my flake outputs and add it to their system with merge/overriding changes, I can clearly version system dependencies for everything that needs them without shipping containers, I can define development shell environments which is basically like python venvs with requires profiles but for every language, I can remotely provision a machine, including disk partitioning and luks and initrd ssh, with a single command, There's a plethora of modules that make setting up complex services with sensible defaults as simple as "enable = true;", ... I could probably go on for a while but yeah permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 3 points 1 week ago* (2 children) I guess it's all down to use cases, eh. I have no use for most of that, so using nix makes no sense for me. And the things that I do do/use in that list, it's just as easy to do without nix, if not easier, such as changing the desktop environment/compositor e.g. Just edit my login shell's config file on a single line, usually. Stuff like that. π No need to learn a whole ass language for that, or learn a new domain language. I like to keep it simple when I can. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [β] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com [S] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) Definitely. It's totally not the right thing for everyone But coming from windows, I remember the first time I wanted to switch from gnome to kde on arch resulted in a week of pain before just reinstalling... As someone who's very forgetful, I also tried to write scripts to automate the changes I make on new systems, and remember what weird fixes I applied, where, and why; would usually end in disaster because of how fragile I felt everything was. I tried freebsd, debian, ubuntu, arch, manjaro, mint, even backtrack5 way back when. None of them stuck for one reason or another. NixOS is the first distro I've used long-term as a daily driver, and I'm pretty convinced it will be the only distro I use going forward (in one form or another). And regarding my point about update frequency, I mention that also because of my experience with arch. Everything is user-error. Reminds me of the straight to jail meme. Update too fast? Borked. Update too slow? Believe it or not, also borked. Update without reading the forum? Straight to borked. Not so much a problem for me now. But again, totally not for everyone. The vast majority even. But it jives with whatever part of whatever spectrums I'm on. permalink fedilink source parent [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 1 week ago* (1 child) Here's how you install Gnome in nixos services.desktopManager.gnome.enable = true; Here's how you also install gdm services.displayManager.gdm.enable = true; permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago And on Arch: doas pacman -S gnome gdm π permalink fedilink source parent
[β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 3 points 1 week ago* (2 children) I guess it's all down to use cases, eh. I have no use for most of that, so using nix makes no sense for me. And the things that I do do/use in that list, it's just as easy to do without nix, if not easier, such as changing the desktop environment/compositor e.g. Just edit my login shell's config file on a single line, usually. Stuff like that. π No need to learn a whole ass language for that, or learn a new domain language. I like to keep it simple when I can. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [β] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com [S] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) Definitely. It's totally not the right thing for everyone But coming from windows, I remember the first time I wanted to switch from gnome to kde on arch resulted in a week of pain before just reinstalling... As someone who's very forgetful, I also tried to write scripts to automate the changes I make on new systems, and remember what weird fixes I applied, where, and why; would usually end in disaster because of how fragile I felt everything was. I tried freebsd, debian, ubuntu, arch, manjaro, mint, even backtrack5 way back when. None of them stuck for one reason or another. NixOS is the first distro I've used long-term as a daily driver, and I'm pretty convinced it will be the only distro I use going forward (in one form or another). And regarding my point about update frequency, I mention that also because of my experience with arch. Everything is user-error. Reminds me of the straight to jail meme. Update too fast? Borked. Update too slow? Believe it or not, also borked. Update without reading the forum? Straight to borked. Not so much a problem for me now. But again, totally not for everyone. The vast majority even. But it jives with whatever part of whatever spectrums I'm on. permalink fedilink source parent [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 1 week ago* (1 child) Here's how you install Gnome in nixos services.desktopManager.gnome.enable = true; Here's how you also install gdm services.displayManager.gdm.enable = true; permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago And on Arch: doas pacman -S gnome gdm π permalink fedilink source parent
[β] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com [S] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) Definitely. It's totally not the right thing for everyone But coming from windows, I remember the first time I wanted to switch from gnome to kde on arch resulted in a week of pain before just reinstalling... As someone who's very forgetful, I also tried to write scripts to automate the changes I make on new systems, and remember what weird fixes I applied, where, and why; would usually end in disaster because of how fragile I felt everything was. I tried freebsd, debian, ubuntu, arch, manjaro, mint, even backtrack5 way back when. None of them stuck for one reason or another. NixOS is the first distro I've used long-term as a daily driver, and I'm pretty convinced it will be the only distro I use going forward (in one form or another). And regarding my point about update frequency, I mention that also because of my experience with arch. Everything is user-error. Reminds me of the straight to jail meme. Update too fast? Borked. Update too slow? Believe it or not, also borked. Update without reading the forum? Straight to borked. Not so much a problem for me now. But again, totally not for everyone. The vast majority even. But it jives with whatever part of whatever spectrums I'm on. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 1 week ago* (1 child) Here's how you install Gnome in nixos services.desktopManager.gnome.enable = true; Here's how you also install gdm services.displayManager.gdm.enable = true; permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago And on Arch: doas pacman -S gnome gdm π permalink fedilink source parent
[β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago And on Arch: doas pacman -S gnome gdm π permalink fedilink source parent
[β] Martineski@lemmy.dbzer0.com [S] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) I like having the same system configuration across machines and be sure that everything is the same. I like having all configuration in one place and have comments near the relevant code for extra clarity. Nixos makes setting up root on ZFS a breeze. System as nix configuration makes it very easy to track changes with version control and informative commits. If I fuck up the system I can easily boot into older generation. System can rebuild only if everything (with proper checks) succeeds giving you a greater confidence in things working. System reinstals are quick and easy so on hardware failure you can go back to work very quickly without having go spend days and weeks getting your system so vagualy similar state as before. Nixos made it easy for me to set up mirrored boot so my system will still work fine when one of my boot drives fails. I get to know what is actually installed on my devices and can easily get rid of it. No dependency hell. I can easily try out a program before installing it permanently with nix shell. Impermanence helps me ensure that every folder and file that I need to keep is documented and keeps them in one place for very easy backups and I have 100% confidence at my backups have everything important. And many other bigger and smaller things that I can't remember right now. I'd honestly be interested in solutions simpler than nix providing the same or greater benefits with more simplicity. E: Also, because my original comment wasn't well worded I will mention that I meant that once you learn how to work with nixos things become easier and once you get the setup going it's just there continuing to work since the effort is paid in advance and you continue getting the benefits just like that. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child) It's about remembering that you did. I have no idea what changes I've made to my ancient Ubuntu box so if an upgrade borks my system again I'm SOL Also, a Nix upgrade won't break your system, unlike Ubuntu permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child) Yeah, better to use Arch or nix to avoid system breakage π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child) Nix, yes, because it has rollbacks permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child) If you need rollbacks, of course. I don't. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child) You need them like you need fire extinguishers My Ubuntu LTS upgrade failed. Would have killed for a rollback permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 6 days ago (1 child) You need fire extinguishers if you have something worth saving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Sometimes I just want to roll back one piece of software. Try doing that with flatpak permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Wouldn't flatpak uninstall do that? Or what do you mean "roll back" in this case? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child) Yeah, better to use Arch or nix to avoid system breakage π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child) Nix, yes, because it has rollbacks permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child) If you need rollbacks, of course. I don't. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child) You need them like you need fire extinguishers My Ubuntu LTS upgrade failed. Would have killed for a rollback permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 6 days ago (1 child) You need fire extinguishers if you have something worth saving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Sometimes I just want to roll back one piece of software. Try doing that with flatpak permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Wouldn't flatpak uninstall do that? Or what do you mean "roll back" in this case? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child) Nix, yes, because it has rollbacks permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child) If you need rollbacks, of course. I don't. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child) You need them like you need fire extinguishers My Ubuntu LTS upgrade failed. Would have killed for a rollback permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 6 days ago (1 child) You need fire extinguishers if you have something worth saving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Sometimes I just want to roll back one piece of software. Try doing that with flatpak permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Wouldn't flatpak uninstall do that? Or what do you mean "roll back" in this case? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child) If you need rollbacks, of course. I don't. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child) You need them like you need fire extinguishers My Ubuntu LTS upgrade failed. Would have killed for a rollback permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 6 days ago (1 child) You need fire extinguishers if you have something worth saving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Sometimes I just want to roll back one piece of software. Try doing that with flatpak permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Wouldn't flatpak uninstall do that? Or what do you mean "roll back" in this case? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child) You need them like you need fire extinguishers My Ubuntu LTS upgrade failed. Would have killed for a rollback permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 6 days ago (1 child) You need fire extinguishers if you have something worth saving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Sometimes I just want to roll back one piece of software. Try doing that with flatpak permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Wouldn't flatpak uninstall do that? Or what do you mean "roll back" in this case? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 6 days ago (1 child) You need fire extinguishers if you have something worth saving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Sometimes I just want to roll back one piece of software. Try doing that with flatpak permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Wouldn't flatpak uninstall do that? Or what do you mean "roll back" in this case? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Sometimes I just want to roll back one piece of software. Try doing that with flatpak permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Wouldn't flatpak uninstall do that? Or what do you mean "roll back" in this case? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Wouldn't flatpak uninstall do that? Or what do you mean "roll back" in this case? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Uninstall uninstalls the package. I want to use an older working version permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Ah. Well, that's simple with pacman. π permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Never used it, but I'm fairly sure you can't have conflicting dependencies with pacman. If package A requires a new dependency version and package B requires an older one you can't have both installed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] victorz@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) This can happen and it's usually solved by just introducing a new package which is the old version of the package, and which won't be updated. But this isn't really the aim of Arch. I've never had this issue except for with Spotify when installed via pacman, and then only needed it to get playback of local music files. After I switched to installing it from Flatpak, it included all the necessary packages with correct versions (obviously, because that's how Flatpak works). But as I said, the aim of Arch is to support working, latest versions of software. If you want to be able to roll back stuff, Arch is probably not for you, even if it's very simple to roll back stuff if you have the package file on disk or it's still available in the remote package repo. But if this is something you often come across, sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent
[β] iopq@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 4 days ago You can roll back if you have the older version on disk if you didn't install newer dependencies that make them incompatible with your system I have this issue with sysd manager, the characters are all boxes in the latest flatpak Nix installs the deps separately if they are different versions and lets you install any version, even some ancient one permalink fedilink source parent