As the title implies, should I do it? I love Arch so far, and I can fix most issues that pop out. However, I sometimes wish to start fresh without too much hassle, but I get a feeling NixOS isn’t as mature as Arch.
Have any of you used both, and if so, what do you miss from Arch? What are you grateful for in NixOS?
I’ve also been distro-hopping, but settled on NixOS. I find it very clean, you know exactly where your (system-level) configuration files are (…and could even manage user-level config files using home-manager). There is a stable branch, which is, well, stable. And even if it wasn’t, you can rollback the system at any point, which is trivial (just select a different generation during boot).
One of the biggest advantages for me is universal reproducible working environments. Using Nix+direnv, I can lock all tools (make, gcc, JupyterLab, Python, Julia) that I’m using in a project to specific versions (and upgrade/rollback). I can install programs/libraries in a
nix shelland they will be removed on the next garbage collection. Upgrades are extremely safe: I once had a problem with RAM that corrupted a lot of my files during an upgrade. Nix can detect and repair this.Downside is that Nix doesn’t follow FHS, so some programs need a little help, for example by Nix’
steam-run.- NixOS has been around almost as long as Arch (20 vs 21 years)
- you can install the Nix package manager on other distros as an intermediate step to start to give you the feel of things – ie. use Arch to manage your system packages and use Nix to manage your user & GUI packages
- the Nix repository has more packages and more up-to-date packages than AUR
- two recent videos making the rounds on NixOS
- NIX OS: the BEST package manager on the MOST SOLID Linux distribution – The Linux Experiment
- NixOS is Mindblowing – Chris Titus Tech
If you make the switch you won’t be able to tell people you use Arch, so keep that in mind.
true, but you’ll be able to tell people you use nix
Nix is the new Arch
