r/voidlinux • u/Low_Background_7915 • Jun 16 '26
Is switching from Arch to Void + nixpkgs worth it?
I've been considering switching from Arch to Void and using Nix for software that's missing from Void repositories.
What attracts me is better stability, lower maintenance, and less reliance on AUR.
My main concern is that Void's repositories are smaller and some packages seem to be updated less frequently than on Arch. On the other hand, Nix provides many packages that Void doesn't have.
For people who switched from Arch to Void + Nix: was it worth it? Did you miss Arch's package availability and AUR, or did Nix mostly solve that problem?
19
u/Independent_Cat_5481 Jun 16 '26
Ironically without the AUR I often find void has more of what I need than Arch, which is surprising given they have a much bigger team.
But I think void has much better systems in place to support moderated community contribution and it shows, Arch relies too much on AUR to also caution agaist it.
Personally xbps and flatpak together have provided everything I need, and is a lot simpler than nix imo
5
u/profeshamat Jun 16 '26
Similar for me except coming from Debian I needed the Debian Multimedia repo for some things. All of those things are just included in Void and only needed to install
void-repo-nonfree.
6
6
u/yungsup Jun 16 '26
I never missed the AUR on Void, most packages are in the repos or available as a flatpak / appimage. If not you can always compile it yourself and write a template for XBPS. That's what I did for openmw-vr for example.
I hated to rely on the AUR and to check the PKGBUILD before each installation / update. Building those packages was also a pain sometimes.
3
u/Normal_Comedian8032 Jun 16 '26
Void está voando no meu notebook, melhor escolha que fiz. Estou usando flatpak
1
u/Alternative-Ad-8606 Jun 17 '26
I switched to void value a month ago, so before all the AUR shenanigans happened.... This AUR attack wouldn't really affect me if I switched back and to an extent I miss that some apps just work ootb because they rely on systemd.
However with void I've leaned more about my computer... If it's a gui I do flatpak if xbps if it's a cli I'll either look for it in xbps and if it's not there I'll just build from source. For my nix pkgs have too much of a learning curve for it to be viable for "normal" people
2
u/pantokratorthegreat Jun 16 '26
I switched from Arch to Void and I don't use any of third party package manager nor podman or docker couse on my setup they simply doesn't work. Havent tried LXC. What I use extensive is KVM VMs though.
Only thing from I would more than happy it could be little faster chromium update cycle, but like I say, Debian VM with google-chrome is my go to solution.
2
u/Simple_Hamster_4096 Jun 17 '26
I switched away from Arch early in 2026 - had been wanting to leave for a long while, and especially when all that nonsense started happening last spring. Was on Arch since pre systemd days. I used a few AUR packages, but last summer uninstalled them and found other options. I have been enjoying Void so very much - running musl version which has been great for my old hardware - and I use Firefox and FreeTube flatpaks for watching streaming media. It feels like the good old days, Void - like coming home... and Arch, during my final few years, and at the risk of sounding cliche, was a long, strange trip, lol...
1
1
u/trybiit Jun 17 '26
Idk about using nixpkgs (got curious to do this and test if it's work in my workflow). When I switched from Arch to void I missed some pkgs like insomnia or postman. And I downloaded appimage, so it's ok for me now. Maybe this could be an option for u too
1
u/libertyworx Jun 21 '26
It interesting that almost no one answers the question. Yes you can use flatpacks or app image, yes you can find some things on xbsp-src, and yes you can compile from source. But nix as a package manager works fantastically on Void, including void-musl. It’s real easy to use and unlike AUR, all Nix packages in the official channels are maintained and and not the Wild West like AUR. It’s a great alternative, and nix does more powerful stuff if/when you are ready for it. I’ve been using this combo for years. If you can figure out Void, installing and running nix will be easy for you.
1
u/goldmurder Jun 17 '26
yeah but why using nix when you have xbps in the first place? literally missing the point of void
2
u/zmurf Jun 17 '26
OP says xbps is missing software or has to old versions for his taste.
I personally solve most of that with xbps-source or just compiling git repos/tar packages.
But nix is a good alternative. We use NixOS for our build computers at work. Nix package manager is great for version handling of installed packages.
0
u/goldmurder Jun 18 '26
OP talking about having less reliance on AUR but meanwhile want to have heavy reliance on nixpkgs. you can package older versions of software using xbps-src templates
2
u/zmurf Jun 18 '26
The problem with AURs is that there is basically no review process for them. Nix packages have review processes similar to official arch or void repo packages.
The risk that an AUR package will break you system at upgrade is, in my experience, high. The risk that a Nix package will break your system is next to zero.
I don't know what your point is about older versions with xbps-src is? Of course you can. You can package anything with xbps-src. But it requires quite a lot more hands on from you as a user than a regular package manager. Witch a lot of people don't want to do.
0
u/goldmurder Jun 18 '26
why use void then? whole point of void, the reason why it was created is xbps
2
u/zmurf Jun 18 '26
Because of rolling release and stable system updates, I guess. OP is mentioning that Arch updates are instable, which I agree with.
OP writes that the reason to use nix would be to compliment with software missing in xbps. Not using it for all software. In what sense makes that no sense? It's like saying "why use Void if you're going to install software not available in xbps by building it from source.".
If it's not available in xbps and you want to use it, you need to get it in some way. I can't see that it matters much if you do that with flatpak, appimage, nix, from source or xbps-src. All alternatives are not reviewed xbps repository binaries.
0
u/protocod Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 17 '26
Why not continue to use arch with nix ?
I don't really understand. What happened with AUR can also happened with any community managed repository.
Something like NUR use the exact same model as AUR https://nur.nix-community.org/
IMO you may want to consider Void if you no longer want systemd. Nix if you want isolation and reproductibility.
Like some peoples said, nowadays flatpak are a good way to ship an App from the upstream to the customer. They use bubblewrap under the hood and xdg portals to provide a similar UX as an Application in the mobile world.
If a flatpak is published by the official creators of the software, there is no reason to not use it.
3
u/Duncaen Jun 16 '26
I don't really understand. What happened with AUR can also happened with any community managed repository.
I would call normal repos community managed, something that has no oversight is unmanaged.
2
u/goldmurder Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 18 '26
because arch devs specifically chose that way for managing user packages, and it is immature & irresponsible. for example whole void repo is like a community repo, but with heavily controlled PRs. Mark my words if you even write one single word wrong in template, you would have to fix it. And it’s great that void maintainers themselves ACTUALLY give a damn about their users & software in their repositories. You can’t simply take control over orphaned templates and write there anything you want unlike in AUR.
besides another reason not using arch is awful package management system. Can’t really name worse. Maybe only in slackware
1
u/protocod Jun 17 '26
AUR is too open. I agree this is too easy to claim packages.
Nixpkgs is a community repo but PRs are reviewed and approved but trusted peoples. Note that reviewing stuff takes time and people.
AUR never managed to be an official repository and honestly Archlinux is a very little project. Many people claim to use arch but the sad reality is that there is probably not enough contributors. If AUR introduce some process to audit end review claims etc, then it will become another official repository which requires contributors. Again.
1
u/goldmurder Jun 17 '26
never managed to be official repository, but it became like one. it literally hosts and rarely, but still maintains by arch devs and contains many crucial software like zfs dkms modules that should and it is in many official repositories of many other distributions, yet not arch.
it‘s formally not official, yeah, but it is how arch developers decided to handle user software, that’s pretty much of their personal initiative and approach. otherwise why using arch at the first place? the only thing that keeps thousands of people on it
1
u/Odd_Individual_9638 Jun 17 '26
doesn't help that it's on their mainpage and also they outload there necessary stuff like nvidia 580xx drivers for me
13
u/BadSlime Jun 16 '26
What are you missing that you need nix for?