4 ms·

From the point of view of an absolute beginner, Linus shouldn't even be on a terminal. The PopOS shop should've worked. If it didn't work, a package installatio

• ayushnix 5y ago
  Looks like the apt developers were sensible enough to fix this problem rather than blaming the user for not reading a wall of text. https://twitter.com/JulianKlode/status/1461026051405058048 https://twitter.com/JulianKlode/status/1461026051405058048
  • pxc 5y ago
    Kind of. The apt developers have taken steps to make it harder to remove essential and protected packages, which is a good idea. It would also be a good idea to make the warnings emit red text, some of it flashing, and to replace any override prompt with a more explicit one. It would also, in my opinion, be good to have apt finally start removing orphaned dependencies by default (like many, if not most, package managers already do), so you don't have that big list of orphaned deps at the top. But on Debian, Ubuntu, and other Debian-based distros, the desktop environment is neither protected nor essential, so this prompt or error message won't even come up if a dependency conflict requires removing the DE in order to satisfy the dependencies of some new app. > a package installation shouldn't have asked him to nuke his GUI in huge wall of text, it should've rejected him Experience helps, but it doesn't take an expert to tell that removing 90 packages in order to install 1 application doesn't seem normal. (Occasionally one does see things like that during major dist-upgrades.) The mere fact of the wall of text itself WAS a huge warning. A package manager should offer to do whatever is required to complete the operation you've asked of it, as long as it won't brick your system (render it unrecoverable without recourse to external media or devices, or render the package manager itself inoperable). (If what you've asked it to do is sufficiently explicit, maybe it should even remove itself.) It should also give you the resources (as apt does, through `apt show`) to inspect each package marked for removal and installation, in case you don't know what they are. One of the reasons I like Unix-like operating systems (aside from macOS, which violates this principle) is that they don't waste your time with tons of warnings and locks and gates that don't actually mean anything, or which prevent you from doing things that are in fact harmless and unlikely to cause you any trouble. It's fine for distros like Pop!_OS to extend the notion of ‘bricking’ the system to include removing the desktop environment. But I'm not very interested in running systems which are designed to cater to people who want to use them (and use them recklessly, at that) without understanding them at the expense of users who are willing to learn how they work.
    • ayushnix 5y ago
      > Experience helps, but it doesn't take an expert to tell that removing 90 packages in order to install 1 application doesn't seem normal. You're looking at it from a seasoned Linux user's perspective, not from the perspective of a guy who has used Windows for decades and can't remember the last time he needed to use the Command Prompt. I don't know if it's lack of empathy or unrelenting bias. Is it hard to believe that millions of desktop users don't understand what a "package" or a "dependency" is? Windows doesn't link packages dynamically, it's just fat statically linked exe files, or exe files bundled with everything needed, like AppImages. For someone who's never known the concept of a dependency, expecting him to understand that wall of text is pretty elitist. > One of the reasons I like Unix-like operating systems (aside from macOS, which violates this principle) is that they don't waste your time with tons of warnings and locks and gates Yes, agreed, and I'm of the same opinion, which is why I use Linux as a daily driver. However, this is NOT the experience a new user or a complete beginner should have. A power user experience for beginner is like giving keys to a car to someone who's never driven one and asking him to drive in a metropolitan city with millions of cars on the road. You know what's gonna happen and it'd be pretty weird and apathetic to blame the beginner if he crashes his car and gets injured, which is what you're doing. > But I'm not very interested in running systems which are designed to cater to people who want to use them (and use them recklessly, at that) without understanding them at the expense of users who are willing to learn how they work. Sure, but then let's not proselytize Linux and how it's beginner friendly and how it's "better" than Windows or Mac when the intended usage involves knowing how to work on a terminal. Unless you can confidently say that this Linux distribution doesn't require you to touch the terminal, ever, not once, don't recommend it. This is why I don't recommend anyone to use Linux, not unless I want to waste their time and see them in pain.
      • pxc 5y ago
        > You're looking at it from a seasoned Linux user's perspective, not from the perspective of a guy who has used Windows for decades and can't remember the last time he needed to use the Command Prompt. I'm writing with Hacker News readers, and especially developers (as mentioned somewhere upstream in this thread), in mind as prospective Linux users. For them, I don't think what happened to Linus represents a difficulty they will struggle with or find difficult to avoid. > Is it hard to believe that millions of desktop users don't understand what a "package" or a "dependency" is? Windows doesn't link packages dynamically, it's just fat statically linked exe files, or exe files bundled with everything needed, like AppImages. For someone who's never known the concept of a dependency, expecting him to understand that wall of text is pretty elitist. It's not hard to believe at all. That's why, imo, distributions that target users migrating from Windows— especially distros that target Windows ‘power users’— should generally direct users away from package managers like apt in favor of package managers which avoid negotiating dependency conflicts in a single global namespace, like Flatpak, Snap, AppImage, Guix, etc. I agree that Linus' experience was a problem, especially for Pop!_OS, given its mission. But I don't think apt was really ill-behaved here, and I don't think interventions at the level of apt's behavior are likely to be as effective as directing new users toward more appropriate tools when they ‘just wanna install Steam’, so-to-speak. > Sure, but then let's not proselytize Linux and how it's beginner friendly and how it's "better" than Windows or Mac when the intended usage involves knowing how to work on a terminal. Agreed, kinda. I've never recommended desktop Linux to a Windows ‘power user’, and nowadays there isn't really one I would recommend to such a person unless they asked me what to try. I have recommended desktop Linux to totally non-technical people I'm willing to support, though. After the first week, I pretty much don't hear from them again until the hardware dies. I've also recommended desktop Linux to mathematicians and scientists who may have written some code before but don't really know anything about hardware, operating systems, or systems administration. They seem to do fine solving their own issues.