140
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by 7ai@sh.itjust.works to c/linux@lemmy.ml

I hopped from arch (2010-2019) to Nixos (2019-2023). I had my issues with it but being a functional programmer, I really liked the declarative style of configuring your OS. That was until last week. I decided to try out void Linux (musl). I'm happy with it so far.

Why did I switch?

  1. Nix is extremely slow and data intensive (compared to xbps). I mean sometimes 100-1000x or more. I know it is not a fair comparison because nix is doing much more. Even for small tweaks or dependency / toolchain update it'll download/rebuild all packages. This would mean 3-10GB (or more) download on Nixos for something that is a few KB or MB on xbps.

  2. Everything is noticeably slower. My system used way more CPU and Ram even during idle. CPU was at 1-3% during idle and my battery life was 2 to 3.5h. Xfce idle ram usage was 1.5 GB on Nixos. On Void it's around 0.5GB. I easily get 5-7h of battery life for my normal usage. It is 10h-12h if I am reading an ebook.

Nix disables a lot of compiler optimisations apparently for reproducibility. Maybe this is the reason?

  1. Just a lot of random bugs. Firefox would sometimes leak memory and hang. I have only 8 GB of ram. WiFi reconnecting all the time randomly. No such issues so far with void.

  2. Of course the abstractions and the language have a learning curve. It's harder for a beginner to package or do something which is not already exposed as an option. (This wasn't a big issue for me most of the time.)

For now, I'll enjoy the speed and simplicity of void. It has less packages compared to nix but I have flatpak if needed. So far, I had to install only Android studio with it.

My verdict is to use Nixos for servers and shared dev environments. For desktop it's probably not suitable for most.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] norawibb@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 year ago

That is so the opposite experience for me. Every other distro for me just ends up weird after using it too long and I get the symptoms you mentioned. Nixos always stays perfectly clean for me like I never touched it. My hardware (long story) does change my experience a little though.

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah there's a lot of state accumulation especially in home folder which I clear manually from time to time.

In Nixos you can configure the impermanence module to clear unwanted state on your system and make it a "fresh install" on every reboot.

[-] mrh@mander.xyz 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

edit: I do feel norawibb's point, the slippery mutability of Void is something I am a lot less comfortable with than I used to be. Apparently Guix has spoiled me.

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

🎉 Same! I've been looking at Ashos (meta distribution) or just using btrfs snapshots to rollback when I break something.

[-] mrh@mander.xyz 7 points 1 year ago

Yeah rollbacks are probably the best part of immutable OS's, but of almost equal importance is reproducible system configuration, which imo only Nix and Guix do well. Neither snapshots nor Silverblue really manage that yet.

[-] Andy@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

For reproducible configuration in the Arch world, there's a project which always looks good to me: aconfmgr

https://github.com/CyberShadow/aconfmgr

I think Arch+aconfmgr+yadm+btrfs == a pretty solid arrangement.

Though I'm of course itching for first class Bcachefs support...

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah. For reproducibility I still use nix. Especially when I have to share my dev environment with a team or to spin up identical servers.

[-] dino@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

Can you give an example in what kind of scenario you would want "identical servers"? In my head that is where tools like ansible come into play..?

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

You can achieve similar results with ansible. But I like nix better. It is reproducible. You can think of it like docker.

Nix is also declarative and has rollback. Also, nixos-rebuild is idempotent.

[-] Chewy7324@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

The great thing about Nix is that it achieves reproducibility with the package manager. Container and Ansible depend on taking a system and documenting steps to bring it to the desired state. This state then might deviate over time (e.g. crashing while updating).

But yes, for most practical use it probably doesn't make much of a difference. For me Nix forces me to document what I'm doing, which I might not do for "quick and simple change" on other systems.

[-] Chewy7324@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago

My problem with snapshots is that sometimes I break something and notice it way later. This accumulated state at one point breaks something (i.e. I break something). With NixOS I'm forced to do things right, which is also annoying and time consuming.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dino@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

Cool that you mention also the other contender OS in that regard. Interestingly you both chose Void as your comparison...I would be curious to why? @7ai@sh.itjust.works

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I just wanted something lightweight and fast. It was between alpine (gentoo based), void and artix (arch based). I decided to go for void because it's new and an independent distro. I'll try the other two some day.

[-] dino@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago

I sense a dislike for systemd. :D Actually didn't know alpine is gentoo based. Thanks for your insight.

[-] Atemu@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

It is not. Alpine is independant and uses a ports-like packaging system.

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

I was just going off based on its history. It began based on gentoo. (Wikipedia) but yea it is independent now.

[-] Euphoma@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago

In my experience, doing small changes to your nix config when using nix flakes seems to be faster. For me it only rebuilds everything when I run nix flake update before running sudo nixos-rebuild switch so it seems faster because it only does the thing that I changed instead of updating everything.

[-] lloram239@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago

Also this in your configure.nix:

  nix.registry = {
    nixpkgs = {
      from = {
        type = "indirect";
        id = "nixpkgs";
      };
      to = {
        type = "path";
        path = inputs.nixpkgs.outPath;
      };
    };
  };

This will create an entry in the nix registry pointing to your currently installed version and stop nix search from constantly updating the package list.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah. Most small changes will not rebuild everything. It's just the core dependency updates that are most expensive. Like say openssl got a minor update. Now every package that depends on it needs to be rebuilt and rehashed because of the way nix store works.

[-] senkora@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

Does Nix have Guix-style grafts? I know that in theory that is how Guix lessens the minor-update-to-core dependency problem. But I only use Guix for dev environments so I don’t know how well it works in practice.

[-] lloram239@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Nix doesn't support that officially, there is replace-dependency, but it's not in common use:

https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Documentation_Gaps#Does_nix_support_binary_grafting_like_guix.3F

There is also patchelf to adjust the RPATH and other stuff backed into compiled binaries, which is in common use, but not for patching.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Drito@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago

How the hell many people installs Void without problems. I tried two times and I always had wierds behaviours that makes me going back to arch.

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Was it recent? I remember doing the same some years ago 😆

[-] Drito@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

One year approximatively. But I elaborate a bit, I installed the minimal version, because I use bspwm. I had issues since the tty log in. Probably the xfce iso is OK.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

You might be interested in trying Gentoo, which is what I use. The package manager is definitely not fast, but it is very powerful. You get a lot of NixOS-like powers, but it integrates seamlessly into the unix eco-system without NixOS' overhead or its unorthodox approach that causes trouble sometimes. It also has first class support for compiler optimizations and global management of compile flags for packages.

So yeah, updates will not be fast at all, but the rest I think you'll enjoy.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] featherfurl@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I also haven't noticed a significant performance hit from using nixos on desktop coming from arch a few months ago. Nix definitely does a lot of stuff and that can chew through bandwidth at times, but overall I think the time saved from not compiling heaps of aur packages has outweighed the time lost to nix updating and maintaining the overall state of my system on every update.

I tend to run relatively lightweight systems these days and haven't really noticed sluggishness compared to an equivalent system on arch. My desktop environment has been sway on both for a while and this may account for my experience of a leaner and more reliable system on both, but it's hard to say.

I'd definitely want to investigate bandwidth optimization strats for nix if I was heavily constrained in that area, or possibly move to something where cpu and bandwidth constraints were given priority over reproducibility. For my current setup nixos has been a game changer on both desktop and server, but I only really have arch as a direct comparison.

( For context, my current desktop nixos systems are a 9 year old low-end cintiq, a 2017 dell optiplex 7050 minipc, and a steam deck. They all have ssds and at least 12gb of ram. All feel super snappy for everyday work with a web browser and a heap of open terminals and workspaces. )

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] iopq@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

I think the verdict is NixOS is perfect for desktops, since you probably don't care about data or compiling everything or slight inefficiencies

[-] monotrox@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

That really depends on what kind of computer you are using and how fast your internet connection is. Also a desktop computer should be (for most people) as little maintanance work as possible and having long update/install times really stands in the way of that.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dino@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 year ago

Very reasonable and insightful write up. Thanks for sharing!

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago
[-] yopyop@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Could you also share the differences you perceived between Arch and Void ?

[-] danileonis@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Void feel faster on old hardware due to systemd missing, the real problem is no-AUR imo.

[-] blank_sl8@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Systemd won't make anything slower once the system is booted up, it's barely doing anything.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Other than the obvious things like arch having better docs and lots of packages, void reminds me of arch before systemd. Especially editing rc.conf etc.

[-] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago

I know you haven't used it for 4 years, but how would you compare arch to Nix and Void?

I'm asking because I'm using an arch based distro, but I've been eyeing both nix and void and wondering if they're worth trying.

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Arch and void are very similar except void has a smaller community and much smaller set of packages to install. Arch also has better documentation.

Void is considered more lightweight because it uses runit instead of systemd and a choice to use musl instead of glibc.

I feel for most, arch is a better choice of the three.

[-] nieceandtows@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

I’ve been experiencing a total system crash/hang due to Firefox or steam on endeavour OS. Never had such issues on nobara. Any idea why?

[-] lloram239@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

When you have full system crashes there is a very high chance it's the graphics drivers, journalctl -b -1 might show some information why it crashes, as it's often just the graphics output that freezes, not the rest of the system.

Another common form of crashing is just running out of memory. Linux still handles that not well at all and will just freeze for a long long long time (SysRq-F will invoke the OOM killer, which can often help and speed up the process dramatically, there are other workaround like earlyoom).

[-] Xylight@lemmy.xylight.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Really? In my experience NixOS is faster than Arch.

edit: this isn't arguing against him, i've heard lots of cases where Arch is indeed faster. For me though, I feel like nixos is faster for my use cases.

[-] 7ai@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

You mean in terms of how fast it feels? I have never heard anyone saying this before. Can you share some details and perhaps some tips to improve performance on Nixos?

What hardware do you run Nixos on and do you modify and rebuild a lot of packages on nixpkgs?

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
140 points (97.3% liked)

Linux

47557 readers
698 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS