Reposting because it looks like federation failed.
I was just reading about it, it sounds like a pretty cool OS and package manager. Has anyone actually used it?
GUIX is a GNU project and acts like proprietary software does not exist/is not a basic necessity in 2023.
Gross oversimplification, Guix absolutely knows that proprietary software exists, but also Guix is a project that values transparent build process (unlike Nix, which allows binaries and nonfree packages).
If you don’t have the requisite bare metal to run Guix by itself, you can run it as a foreign package manager (on top of your existing distribution), in a virtual machine, or alongside package channels outside of guix that package nonfree software.
The linux-libre kernel is only an issue for Guix System (the analogue to NixOS for Nix) and for users who need that specific hardware to be used. Guix is a breath of fresh air in package managers who attempt to sweep nonfree software under the rug and try to make the issue invisible.
If you don’t have the requisite bare metal to run Guix by itself
That’s a bit disingenuous wording as modern hardware that can run without proprietary firmware is an absolute rarity at this point.
The vast majority of people on earth do not have access to such hardware.
The linux-libre kernel is only an issue for Guix System (the analogue to NixOS for Nix)
Point taken. I was talking about the OS aspect of both though, given that @Ramin_HAL9001@lemmy.ml compared it to Debian and Fedora.
The project should have really kept the GuixSD name. Much clearer separation and also sounds a lot better.
package managers who attempt to sweep nonfree software under the rug and try to make the issue invisible.
Which ones?
In Nix, you get a giant red error when you try to eval unfree software and need to explicitly opt-in.
That’s a bit disingenuous wording as modern hardware that can run without proprietary firmware is an absolute rarity at this point.
But it’s not impossible, nor is it something that can’t be solved in the future with CPU architectures like RISC-V.
The project should have really kept the GuixSD name. Much clearer separation and also sounds a lot better.
Agreed.
package managers who attempt to sweep nonfree software under the rug and try to make the issue invisible.
I should have been more clear, excluding nonfree blobs were widely decided to be a lost cause across the distribution space. The final being Debian very recently. Tbh I do sometimes wish that Guix took the Nix approach with hardware-configuration.nix, but the fact remains is that the Guix maintainers do not wish to maintain nonfree packages and I respect that decision as Guix doesn’t go out of its way to prevent others from installing the nonfree blobs/packages themselves.
