I don't want to repeat myself. I told what the innovations are, things only Nix
Well, you said yourself. NixOS did the innovation years ago. And guess what, I didn't hear much from nixos users either. It's like it starts and ends with gentoo as far as source-based distros go.
As for how exactly innovative that is, well, it's another layer of scripting above, essentially. Maybe better scripting than shell spaghetti, but there are fundamental flaws with that approach.
but doing nothing about it is not going to help
To help with what, exactly? What do you do if toolchain fucks up and doesn't produce consistent results? Well, you stop using your damn toolchain for a start and start debugging, not doing some reproducibility nonsense.
Well, hot redpill for you - Linux is just a kernel, GNU/Linux is the system. Kernel is shit, because it is monolithic. There's the Hurd with better architecture (yes, that's this garbage GNU software, better than Linux).
The point went over your head and you went on a tangent, because you are a stupid butthurt motherfucker.
Bootstrapping gcc and GNU/Linux distribution is one of main goals of Guix System
Look at the world giving a fuck. Do you live under a rock?
GCC is built by default by compiling itself 3 times over, each new time with a version from the previous time.
Gentoo builds stages, DUH. These are used in scripts that use stages to build stages. Maybe it's not strict reproducibility, I didn't play with them enough, but I think you can get bit-by-bit stages, for example.
You can't trust code that you did not totally create yourself.
Old news, buddy. Did you write your own compiler, punk? Then fuck off.
"I don't care about reproducibility"
In a current Linux ecosystem, I don't. It's useless.
Also thanks for explaining this to me it is much better than "your distro is shit" guy above
His words are general as fuck, but whatever.
Let me teach you secrets on how to make rock-stable simple&consistent loonix distro. You follow GNU guys on what basic toolchain versions (binutils-gcc-glibc) tools they use together. Or maybe not, just pick whatever close by date and stick to it. You build your basic system (there are different ways of building up to a host-independent platform) and you are basically self-hosted now. After that you carefully pick software and build the rest, while using that shit, because oh boy there gonna be bugs. After you have your package set, you freeze everything in place and basically don't touch anything basic unless you absolutely need to. Call that "release". That's how slack is done, though they expose their mid-of-the-road updates and security updates in slackware-current, their kinda rolling release place. They are not usually basic updates, so it's not painful to update.
Now, the rolling release distros have ongoing update, which might suffer quality costs and might break on rare updates, like, if the system moves so fast that your latest sync will skip some important assumption (it is a shitty thing by devs, but might happen). Those rolling release might have different, well, let's call them flavors, for like unstable/testing/stable, which means basically if you want new shit, move to unstable, if you want slightly less bugs, move to stable. Slackware is very stable, it's stable as fuck, the quality of maintainer work here is good (as I said earlier), and that's what actually matters, not some reproducibility bullshit.