5 ms·

As a Linux user from the 90s, I welcome this change. RPM Hell and its Debian equivalent are real and painful things. When disk space was a premium, system dyn

by axaxs 7y ago

As a Linux user from the 90s, I welcome this change. RPM Hell and its Debian equivalent are real and painful things. When disk space was a premium, system dynamic linking made sense. Today, it absolutely does not. rpm-ostree is a bit ugly. Snap has the right idea of doing both system services and apps. Fedora should do the same.

ghostpepper 7y ago
While I can appreciate the security advantages of snap packages, I can't help but resent the fact that the output of the mount command is now polluted with dozens of lines unrelated to mounted disks.
- axaxs 7y ago
  Agreed on that front. That's really my biggest issue with snaps.
- quicklime 7y ago
  Thank you, it's nice to know that I'm not the only one who thinks this. You could use an alias to hide this: alias df='df -x squashfs' Given that squashfs is a read-only filesystem, I don't know why this isn't done by default. No one needs to worry about how much free space is left on an ro volume. I also go a few steps further and disable udev (-x devtmpfs) and tmpfs (-x tmpfs) as well.
- dmckeon 7y ago
  Try findmnt(8) like: findmnt --df --types
KUcxrAVrtI 7y ago
>system dynamic linking made sense I too look forwards to having to manually updated all security patches for each binary in the system.
- axaxs 7y ago
  Would you rather each update of said binary be dependent on the author or some volunteer? That's how you get Debian stable.. No thanks.
  - diffeomorphism 7y ago
    On the author of the single vulnerable library instead of the hundreds of authors of projects making use of it, yes please. The fact that things like flatpak, snap, nix all explicitly try to address this problem with platforms/base layers/grafting etc. is very telling. They are all a trade off of your security vs. the dev's convenience, which might be necessary to succeed.
  - stOneskull 7y ago
    I love Debian stable for this. And then we get MX, Deepin, Ubuntu and Mint..
  - e2le 7y ago
    I prefer the quality control that something like Debian stable provides, developers aren't always interested in packaging their application the right way or are just ignorant of how to package their application for one of many distros all with their own package format and tools.
- wmf 7y ago
  The brave new OSTree/Flatpak world needs build systems that know how to do security updates. There's a lot of work in this area in the Dockerverse; maybe it will cross over.
  - michaelmrose 7y ago
    What happens is that half of your security updates never happen because it depends on individual app providers who have no skin in the game to do so this is unfixable unless apps that are insecure aren't installable.
    - 7y ago

by axaxs 7y ago

ghostpepper 7y ago

While I can appreciate the security advantages of snap packages, I can't help but resent the fact that the output of the mount command is now polluted with dozens of lines unrelated to mounted disks.

axaxs 7y ago
Agreed on that front. That's really my biggest issue with snaps.
quicklime 7y ago
Thank you, it's nice to know that I'm not the only one who thinks this. You could use an alias to hide this: alias df='df -x squashfs' Given that squashfs is a read-only filesystem, I don't know why this isn't done by default. No one needs to worry about how much free space is left on an ro volume. I also go a few steps further and disable udev (-x devtmpfs) and tmpfs (-x tmpfs) as well.
dmckeon 7y ago
Try findmnt(8) like: findmnt --df --types

KUcxrAVrtI 7y ago

>system dynamic linking made sense I too look forwards to having to manually updated all security patches for each binary in the system.

axaxs 7y ago
Would you rather each update of said binary be dependent on the author or some volunteer? That's how you get Debian stable.. No thanks.
- diffeomorphism 7y ago
  On the author of the single vulnerable library instead of the hundreds of authors of projects making use of it, yes please. The fact that things like flatpak, snap, nix all explicitly try to address this problem with platforms/base layers/grafting etc. is very telling. They are all a trade off of your security vs. the dev's convenience, which might be necessary to succeed.
- stOneskull 7y ago
  I love Debian stable for this. And then we get MX, Deepin, Ubuntu and Mint..
- e2le 7y ago
  I prefer the quality control that something like Debian stable provides, developers aren't always interested in packaging their application the right way or are just ignorant of how to package their application for one of many distros all with their own package format and tools.
wmf 7y ago
The brave new OSTree/Flatpak world needs build systems that know how to do security updates. There's a lot of work in this area in the Dockerverse; maybe it will cross over.
- michaelmrose 7y ago
  What happens is that half of your security updates never happen because it depends on individual app providers who have no skin in the game to do so this is unfixable unless apps that are insecure aren't installable.
  - 7y ago