Okay, so hear me out…
My interest was piqued when I started knowing more and more about NixOS from the recent “I use NixOS btw” wave everywhere. The main selling point for me was the one config file to rule them all. I have always wanted something like that on Arch. And here it is with a dose of immutability, and extra stability in the form atomic updates and whatnot. You also had the option of turning it to a rolling release model; that’s awesome! What’s not to love then?
So, I kept reading even further about NixOS. I got to learn about how the Linux root structure is almost completely different. Building packages from the source follows a completely different procedure. Configuring anything in your system will rely on the main config file, instead of executing the standard terminal command, or editing their respective config file. The list goes on…
I understand that all of this is done by design. They are not flaws, per se. Rather the means to facilitate the philosophy that every NixOS user is after. However, that also does not mean it is inherently flawless in the grand scheme of the entire ecosystem. I personally love Linux, and would always want to grow with my knowledge in how I handle and get things done in it. Wouldn’t me disconnecting away from that, in favour of the NixOS’ arcane methods, just hurt my progression in my Linux learning journey?
This is a genuine question, of course. I have been thinking about this for a few days now, unsure of whether I should change course and get into it or not. I also do not have the time to use other distros aside from what I mainly install; I would be all in. So, what do you all think?
Having been in a similar situation to you, I say go for it. Arch taught me the basics about Linux that I think everyone should know to understand what Nix does under the hood, but as soon as I saw how well NixOS worked on my secondary machine I switched my primary over and I’m not regretting it in the slightest.
That’s not to say Arch is a bad distro, in fact I’d say 99% of my Linux knowledge comes from that excellent community, it really is KISS, but it makes no secret out of what this actually means: making it simple for the maintainer by delivering an almost untouched upstream, which I agree brings the ecosystem forward as it pushes toward a bazaar model where everything works together without the distributor doing too much work of their own. But if you want to keep a system clean in the long run, at one point you realize that you need a system like Ansible (which for me retrospectively has shortcomings that can only be fixed in the underlying system) or Nix integrated in your base system, which NixOS does.
These are the kinds of comments that made me start researching NixOS in the first place. Damn it :D
Well, if it helps you, if there’s no urgent need to switch, you don’t need to, you’re missing out on some good stuff but nothing that can’t be done during the next setup or so. I had to reinstall anyways at one point, initially thinking it’d be Arch again, and then after testing NixOS decided to go that route, the Secure Boot functionality with Lanzaboote was a strong plus. On the other hand, adding your own packages to Arch is somewhat easier I feel, they’re both good distributions, you’re not making a mistake with running either of them.