2009/11/21 Marc Weber <[email protected]>: > I don't think this question is only about free / non-free. > > Probably there are not so many packages (right now) so moving non-free > packages into a non-free directory is fine. > > However glancing at gentoo I notice that they have overlays. > So they solved this kind of problem in a more general way. > > Maybe we'll end up having such kind of overlays in the future as well > who knows? > > Anyway what are the drawbacks creating > > /etc/nixpkgs/nixpkgs-nonfree ? > > Then you can choose to not checkout that repo and you're done. > > If you just remove a directory every svn reset will bring it back, won't > it? > > So before starting to move packages I'd like to see what makes having a > separate branch being a worse solution. > > You could still reference nixpkgs-non-free from nixpkg-free and vice > versa if present. > > nixos already utilizes nixpkgs. > > Of course you have to merge those attr sets in the end. > This could look like this: > > let directories = [ "./nixpkgs-free" "./nixpkgs-non-free" ] ++ getConfig > ["overlays-directories"] []; > existingDirectories = filter doesDirectoryExist directories; > > in mergeAttrs (map import existingDirectories); > > You can reference free packages within non-free using > > { system, ... }: > > free = import ./nixpkgs-free { inherit system ...; }; > > non-free-packgase = stdenv.mkDerivation { > buildInputs = free.gcc; > } > > Then it is very easy adding support for additional repositories. Just > add another path and you're done. > > Then you can add an overlay directory for all those perl / python / > haskell / ruby / .net / Java / ... packages later on. > > I don't think we want every package which can be installed in nixpkgs. > Have a look at sourceforge how many packages exist.. > > If we start separating packages we should do it in a way which > scales in the future as well. > > Marc Weber > _______________________________________________ > nix-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.cs.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >
Hi all, I don't think that separating the free and non-free software expressions by nixpkg directory is a good idea because there is far too much software that will build crippled as free but will also build fully featured as non-free. Maintaining two different expressions for the same source archive is creating more work than necessary IMO. Sources that depend on software like openssl, freetype2, ffmpeg, libmad, etc I will want to build here. So also will others. I don't mind getting the machine to build the binaries from source instead of just downloading a binary; to comply with the law but if it means I have to maintain two expressions to do that, I'll only update the expression that I use. non-free. If the separation of free and non-free by folder goes ahead, the Linux kernel should be going straight in the non-free tree for a start because it's shipping and building firmware blobs. gnu gpl licensed does not always mean non-free. Case and point. Please. There has got to be a better way. Thanks, Tony _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.cs.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
