102
submitted 17 hours ago by ikidd@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Flipper@feddit.org 5 points 12 hours ago

It also is an option to ensure everyone has the same dev environment.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 7 points 12 hours ago
[-] Mihies@programming.dev 2 points 11 hours ago

The docker is not bare metal though.

[-] utopiah@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 hours ago

Does it matter if the overhead is practically irrelevant?

[-] trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 11 hours ago

The biggest downside to containers vs. Nix for me is that Nix can produce binaries for Linux and macOS, whereas docker only helps with Linux unless you can perform literal magic to cross-compile your project on Linux for macOS.

Containers also don't give you reproducible environments, and Nix does.

That said, Nix documentation is ass, so I usually end up going with containers because they require far less suffering to get working because writing a containerfile is much easier than guessing how to hobble together a Nix flake with a mostly undocumented language.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 hours ago

Containers also don't give you reproducible environments, and Nix does.

Of course it does. 🙄

[-] trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 hours ago

Care to elaborate? Containers give you repeatable environments, which are not the same thing as reproducible environments.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)
docker build . -t docker.company.com/build-env:1.0 && docker push docker.company.com/build-env:1.0

But for like 99% of development teams "repeatable" is Good Enough(tm).

[-] trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

So, containers do not get you reproducibility.

For dev environments, repeatable is okay. If you want actually reproducible binaries that you can ship, Nix is better fit for that purpose.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 39 minutes ago

So, containers do not get you reproducibility.

You absolutely do. If you build a container and publish it you will pull down that exact thing every time. How is that not "reproducibility"?

You no what though? Scratch that - who gives a fuck? Bit-for-bit reproducibility takes far more effort than it's worth anyway. Even NixOS isn't completely reproducible. It's a false goal.

For dev environments, repeatable is okay.

It's well more than good enough you mean.

If you want actually reproducible binaries that you can ship, Nix is better fit for that purpose.

Nobody really needs that.

[-] Mihies@programming.dev 1 points 11 hours ago

It could if there are issues accessing hardware directly. Overhead is, as you said, not that important.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2025
102 points (97.2% liked)

Linux

55962 readers
701 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 6 years ago
MODERATORS