Yeah, I would really like to see `nix-env -i` recommended far less often, or at least with the caveat that this should only be for testing packages at the most. I still haven't found a good use case for it personally.
One of the big wins for Nix is its declarative nature (especially for reproducibility) and installing packages in an imperative manner like this just seems to put folks back in the same position as using pacman or apt-get. Please correct me if I'm wrong Nix-ers.
Having used NixOS as the main OS on my personal laptop for the past year or two (and loving it), I've only used `nix-env -i` to install a package once, and immediately regretted it after trying to add a different version of the same package to my main configuration files. This resulted in a conflict, which from memory required me to force reinstall the package again via `nix-env` but specify a lower priority so that it could be replaced automatically when enabling the package via my configuration files... A really strange experience that re-affirmed that nix-env is at least not for me.
For testing packages, I would always recommend `nix-shell -p <package>` as a preferred option. Just type `exit` and then you've left the shell, it's no longer in your PATH and there's no risk of conflicts.
It sucks that you ran into this, but also totally understandable. I think generally the community would consider the nix-env approach of installing and updating packakges an anti-pattern these days, but this certainly isn't obvious when reading through the docs.
> and installing packages in an imperative manner like this just seems to put folks back in the same position as using pacman or apt-get. Please correct me if I'm wrong Nix-ers.
It being similar to the other commands means we can use nix almost no learning curve, only having to know the equivalent commands. It's the beginner's interface, allowing you to get things done right away, and letting you postpone the complexity until you have need for the features/stability it provides.
For example, I originally started using nix because I needed a Java version not in Ubuntu's repo, and being able to say "just install it" instead of having to learn a whole new specification language is a massive benefit.
Yeah I’ve been running Nix on a home server for a couple years and using home manager on my MBP for just as long. The biggest challenge to learning has been all the examples that use nix-env -i.
One of the big wins for Nix is its declarative nature (especially for reproducibility) and installing packages in an imperative manner like this just seems to put folks back in the same position as using pacman or apt-get. Please correct me if I'm wrong Nix-ers.
Having used NixOS as the main OS on my personal laptop for the past year or two (and loving it), I've only used `nix-env -i` to install a package once, and immediately regretted it after trying to add a different version of the same package to my main configuration files. This resulted in a conflict, which from memory required me to force reinstall the package again via `nix-env` but specify a lower priority so that it could be replaced automatically when enabling the package via my configuration files... A really strange experience that re-affirmed that nix-env is at least not for me.
For testing packages, I would always recommend `nix-shell -p <package>` as a preferred option. Just type `exit` and then you've left the shell, it's no longer in your PATH and there's no risk of conflicts.
It sucks that you ran into this, but also totally understandable. I think generally the community would consider the nix-env approach of installing and updating packakges an anti-pattern these days, but this certainly isn't obvious when reading through the docs.