Hacker News Reader

Comment by casept | Hacker News Reader

It's necessary to hardcode paths in order to ensure that the exact version of a dependency is linked into the executable. Without this mechanism, nix packages would not be reproducible and self-contained.

Also, the path isn't really hardcoded. You can use a custom path, but that means you can't use binary caches.

View on HN

I'm sure there are reasons for it, but it still sucks.

It ought to be possible to use binary caches and still swap out the path. (Modifying a string in an ELF executable isn't that hard.)

Modifying a string in ELF is hard. As long as the string has the same length as the original one, it has a good chance to work (but still fails for compressed data). But if you want an arbitrary directory, you need to replace it with a different length path, and that will probably break a lot of things.

It's not that hard if you leave some spare space for string constants in the .rodata section. Nix already patches ELF executables as things stand.

The nix author created utility called patchelf which is used by nix all the time during the build (to rewrite library paths).

As far as I know it creates a new elf each time it is called (it doesn't modify a file on place) so the length of library name is not an issue.

The problem is how it affects all the hashes, which aren't recalculable in such an easy way.

Could you not check the hashes before doing the substitution?

It's not just ELF executables that hardcode the path. There's a ton of different ways to run software which all use hardcoded paths. Which is good! That's the entire value proposition of Nix, in a way, that it's now safe to use hardcoded paths. But you can't edit all those different hardcoded paths in all those different filetypes.

Where else are paths hardcoded? This seems like a huge mess.

Just picking one example off the top of my head, pkg-config files.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com