6 ms·

> Linux is getting better while Windows and macOS getting worse. Well, some things are arguably not getting better. > Flatpak That's part of what's getting w

> Linux is getting better while Windows and macOS getting worse. Well, some things are arguably not getting better. > Flatpak That's part of what's getting worse: Fracturing/deterioration of the use of distribution package management, instead of improving and expanding it. > web applications Another part of what's getting worse: Instead of having compact apps you have to load a behemoth of some web browser/app framework, to do semi-trivial things. There's also systemd; Gnome having taken application UI in a weird an (IMHO) unfortunate direction, and the fact (?) that the hardware resource requirements have risen significantly.

sergeykish 6y ago
Everything has positive and negative consequences. These are just tools, they provide choice. There is a need to package closed source software, to provide dependencies. Some people use outdated distributions, that's root cause. If distribution is switching I'd better search like minded and help with maintaining (or it would be systemd scenario). At least there is application. Everyone is free to make native. There is Void (Linux), runit [1], at least on Arch Linux there is big choice [2]. Fork Gnome, KDE 3 forked as Trinity Desktop Environment [3]. Boot to xmonad — 100MB RAM, Chromium — several GB RAM. It is easy to imagine arguments against — Steam builds distribution platform on top of Linux, no packages there, Wayland vs X11, distributions spread resources, maintainers breaks software. I am not Steam user, I am not Ubuntu user, but I benefit from wider community. [1] https://voidlinux.org/ https://voidlinux.org/ [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/init https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/init [3] http://www.trinitydesktop.org/ http://www.trinitydesktop.org/
eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> That's part of what's getting worse: Fracturing/deterioration of the use of distribution package management, instead of improving and expanding it. Indeed, the popularity of docker, flatpak and hobby/fad distributions and language-specific package managers is leading to many security nightmares and harming traditional distributions. There are reasons for painstakingly vet and package software: - security - stability AKA you don't want to force feature upgrades with new bugs on servers and workstations - legal compliance: people are unaware of the amount of license issues in docker hub, flatpaks and most distributions
- einpoklum 6y ago
  > language-specific package managers I wouldn't include those on the same list. It makes sense for various (source-form) libraries to be maintained and updated and made available independently of the OS and uniformly across operating systems. I don't see this as undermining Linux distributions - as these are used when you're making your own builds anyway. Otherwise - yes, agreed, and it's also about redundancy and bloat when installing software; and some entities writing software that can only run on their own docker image; etc.
  - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
    > these are used when you're making your own builds anyway That's the problem: they encourage building with tons of random stuff pulled from the Internet on the fly, sidestepping OS distributions completely and providing no reproducible building, no vetting, no license review, no long-term security. The leftpad disaster is a good example.
    - einpoklum 6y ago
      Can you link to a description of "the leftpad disaster"? Also - it's not supposed to be "tons of random stuff", it's supposed to be the libraries you're relying on. Maybe I'm missing something in the point you're making?
      - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
        Random link: https://www.davidhaney.io/npm-left-pad-have-we-forgotten-how-to-program/ https://www.davidhaney.io/npm-left-pad-have-we-forgotten-how... > it's supposed to be the libraries you're relying on When an ecosystem has poor engineering practices and encourages small libraries with many dependencies you get a quadratic explosion of indirect dependencies. You might not care about having 100 transitive dependencies until a poor soul has to maintain your code in 4 or 10 years from now.

sergeykish 6y ago

Everything has positive and negative consequences. These are just tools, they provide choice. There is a need to package closed source software, to provide dependencies. Some people use outdated distributions, that's root cause. If distribution is switching I'd better search like minded and help with maintaining (or it would be systemd scenario). At least there is application. Everyone is free to make native. There is Void (Linux), runit [1], at least on Arch Linux there is big choice [2]. Fork Gnome, KDE 3 forked as Trinity Desktop Environment [3]. Boot to xmonad — 100MB RAM, Chromium — several GB RAM. It is easy to imagine arguments against — Steam builds distribution platform on top of Linux, no packages there, Wayland vs X11, distributions spread resources, maintainers breaks software. I am not Steam user, I am not Ubuntu user, but I benefit from wider community. [1] https://voidlinux.org/ https://voidlinux.org/ [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/init https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/init [3] http://www.trinitydesktop.org/ http://www.trinitydesktop.org/

eeZah7Ux 6y ago

> That's part of what's getting worse: Fracturing/deterioration of the use of distribution package management, instead of improving and expanding it. Indeed, the popularity of docker, flatpak and hobby/fad distributions and language-specific package managers is leading to many security nightmares and harming traditional distributions. There are reasons for painstakingly vet and package software: - security - stability AKA you don't want to force feature upgrades with new bugs on servers and workstations - legal compliance: people are unaware of the amount of license issues in docker hub, flatpaks and most distributions

einpoklum 6y ago
> language-specific package managers I wouldn't include those on the same list. It makes sense for various (source-form) libraries to be maintained and updated and made available independently of the OS and uniformly across operating systems. I don't see this as undermining Linux distributions - as these are used when you're making your own builds anyway. Otherwise - yes, agreed, and it's also about redundancy and bloat when installing software; and some entities writing software that can only run on their own docker image; etc.
- eeZah7Ux 6y ago
  > these are used when you're making your own builds anyway That's the problem: they encourage building with tons of random stuff pulled from the Internet on the fly, sidestepping OS distributions completely and providing no reproducible building, no vetting, no license review, no long-term security. The leftpad disaster is a good example.
  - einpoklum 6y ago
    Can you link to a description of "the leftpad disaster"? Also - it's not supposed to be "tons of random stuff", it's supposed to be the libraries you're relying on. Maybe I'm missing something in the point you're making?
    - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
      Random link: https://www.davidhaney.io/npm-left-pad-have-we-forgotten-how-to-program/ https://www.davidhaney.io/npm-left-pad-have-we-forgotten-how... > it's supposed to be the libraries you're relying on When an ecosystem has poor engineering practices and encourages small libraries with many dependencies you get a quadratic explosion of indirect dependencies. You might not care about having 100 transitive dependencies until a poor soul has to maintain your code in 4 or 10 years from now.