Considering that you most likely edit Nix code in the installer, that
seems like a useful thing.
The size of the ISO I got from
nix-build nixos/release.nix -A iso_minimal.x86_64-linux
is still at 877M.
The `boot.zfs.enabled` option is marked `readOnly`, so this is the only way to
successfully build a NixOS installer image for platforms that zfs does not build
for.
Co-authored-by: Alyssa Ross <hi@alyssa.is>
ZFS's popularity is growing, and not including it by default is a
bit frustrating. On top of that, the base iso includes ZFS
_anyway_ due to other packages depending upon it.
I think we're in the clear to do this on the basis that Oracle
probably doesn't care, it is probably fine (the SFLC agrees) and
we're a small fish. If a copyright holder asks us to, we can
definitely revert it again.
This reverts commit 33d07c7ea9.
The nixos-manual service already uses w3m-nographics for a variant that
drops unnecessary junk like various image libraries.
iso_minimal closure (i.e. uncompressed) goes from 1884M -> 1837M.
This includes fuse-common (fusePackages.fuse_3.common) as recommended by
upstream. But while fuse(2) and fuse3 would normally depend on
fuse-common we can't do that in nixpkgs while fuse-common is just
another output from the fuse3 multiple-output derivation (i.e. this
would result in a circular dependency). To avoid building fuse3 twice I
decided it would be best to copy the shared files (i.e. the ones
provided by fuse(2) and fuse3) from fuse-common to fuse (version 2) and
avoid collision warnings by defining priorities. Now it should be
possible to install an arbitrary combination of "fuse", "fuse3", and
"fuse-common" without getting any collision warnings. The end result
should be the same and all changes should be backwards compatible
(assuming that mount.fuse from fuse3 is backwards compatible as stated
by upstream [0] - if not this might break some /etc/fstab definitions
but that should be very unlikely).
My tests with sshfs (version 2 and 3) didn't show any problems.
See #28409 for some additional information.
[0]: https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/releases/tag/fuse-3.0.0
It seems that it is a GPL violation to distribute zfs in the
installation ISOs.
https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2016/feb/25/zfs-and-linux/
If anyone knows the issue better and has a reason to reenable it
legally, feel free to reenable it. I don't know much about it.
This reverts commit e8e8164f34. I
misread the original commit as adding the "which" package, but it only
adds it to base.nix. So then the original motivation (making it work
in subshells) doesn't hold. Note that we already have some convenience
aliases that don't work in subshells either (such as "ll").
