6 ms·

I'm not against Nix or any package manager. What I'm against is the general fragmentation of Linux that makes interoperability between distro's and window manag

I'm not against Nix or any package manager. What I'm against is the general fragmentation of Linux that makes interoperability between distro's and window managers problematic. If there's every going to be a Year Of The Linux Desktop (TM) then there must be a way for a user to fulfill the expectation that they can select "Linux" instead of "Mac" and "Windows" when downloading software, and when they double click or drag it or whatever, it just installs without a fuss about which distribution they're using or which UI libraries they need or which package manager they use.

podge 5y ago
I agree with your point about fragmentation. But isn't the "Year Of The Linux Desktop" just a joke at this point? Even more so now that desktop computing is becoming less and less important to most people.
- bee_rider 5y ago
  Well, we can't look forward to "Year Of The Linux Phone," because that's been around for a while now in the form of Android. Maybe "Year Of The Actual, Like, Real Linux Phone, Ugh, You Know What I Mean," though?
ghostwriter 5y ago
There's no fragmentation, Nix apart from many other things is first of all a build system, and it can build Debian and/or RPM packages for you from the same sources it uses for NixOS [1] [1] https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Nixpkgs/Building_RPM_DEB_with_nixpkgs https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Nixpkgs/Building_RPM_DEB_with_nixpkg...
smoldesu 5y ago
The problem as I can see it is that the "solutions" don't really work either. Here's your options, in order of viability: - AppImage. Basically the idea of "Apps" ripped straight out of MacOS and injected right into Linux. Works fine, but clutters your home directory with Another Folder and doesn't integrate with your desktop like a native package. - Snap. Works on any system that can install snapd, is owned by Canonical (a pro or a con depending on who you ask), but also auto-updates and has occasional performance problems. Plus, snapd is generally kinda fussy. - Flatpak. Sandboxing taken to it's (il)logical extremes. If you like random data loss, confusing package manifests, low-performance and generally broken software, this is the way to go. Of course, most people like it when their compositor doesn't break when installing third-party programs, so they avoid it like the plauge. It's a uniquely bad format, almost worth spinning up a Linux VM to try it for a laugh. Just make sure to use GNOME, it's useless anywhere else. That's the true hallmark of a cross-distro packaging solution! So yeah, we're probably due in for Another Competing Standard. At this point though, I think most developers are contented to just ship an RPM and an Arch package and let everyone else figure stuff out for themselves. Honestly, I prefer that approach when compared to the blasted wasteland that is cross-distro package management.
- 3np 5y ago
  Could you be more specific about your issues with Flatpak? No idea what you’re talking about here.
  - 1_player 5y ago
    It's trolling of the "everything new in Linux is crap" type, just check their post history. Random data loss because one uses Flatpak, seriously?
    - smoldesu 5y ago
      > Random data loss because one uses Flatpak, seriously? I wish I was joking: https://twitter.com/planner_todo/status/1492084099875586049 https://twitter.com/planner_todo/status/1492084099875586049
      - 1_player 5y ago
        Ah because of a bug in an app (or it's packaging), the whole flatpak ecosystem is corrupt and causes data loss? How is that different that someone mistakingly causing an rm -rf /home in an RPM post-install script? Try again.
        smoldesu 5y ago
        So now we're blaming developers for messing up with sandboxed systems? I really hope this isn't the rhetoric you use to convince people to start packaging with Flatpak...
        3np 5y ago
        You're the only one assigning blame to anyone here. Not all problems need a villain. Both of these things can be true at the same time: The library authors ultimately messed it up and could have prevented it by reading documentation better. Flatpak has a footgun and could have prevented it by better dev UX and/or structuring docs differently. Hopefully this incident is leading to improvements in both.
Ericson2314 5y ago
The major problem here is the lack of dialogue between language-specific package managers and distro package managers. I think once that is fixed, a lot of stuff will start improving. I wrote https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/109/ https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/109/ in hopes Nix can help lead the way here.
- AlphaSite 5y ago
  If this were true Mac and Windows wouldn’t thrive, but they do just fine without a system level package manager at all.
  - Ericson2314 5y ago
    Err i was trying to answer > What I'm against is the general fragmentation of Linux that makes interoperability between distro's and window managers problematic. I disagree that downloading software being hard is a major impediment. (though I realize the parent did continue to claim that.) How many people download executables on the regular anyways?
  - nick__m 5y ago
    Windows now has a first-party package manager: https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli It positively surprised me when I did `sudo winget upgrade` (I first did `winget install gerardog.gsudo` in an admin prompt) and it detected and upgraded the majority of the already installed OSS on my Windows workstation.
wheresmycraisin 5y ago
Aren't we past that? Vast majority of Linux desktops are Ubuntu/Debian or Redhat/Centos. You target those two and you're set. Add Suse if you have a large European user base.
- 3836293648 5y ago
  Or just target flatpak and let it mostly just work
qbasic_forever 5y ago
Nix doesn't have anything to do with that problem. If anything it helps as it lets multiple even conflicting versions of libraries and software coexist and run together. What you want is flatpak or appimage (or even snap). These are self contained distributed binaries that contain and isolate all their dependencies. It is simply a one file download for any linux distro. They work great--I use a ton of flatpak apps like VS Code all the time.
contravariant 5y ago
You phrase this as if it's getting continually worse, but I'm not sure if distros were ever that interoperable (unless you deliberately restrict yourself to a point in time where there was exactly 1 distro). If anything it seems to me that you now have a decent chance to get software to run on any recent distro, which wasn't always the case. Though that's just my impression, I'd be happy to be proven wrong by someone better informed.
chlorion 5y ago
I am not so sure that this is really as big of a problem as it's made out to be. To me it seems like people trying to make Linux software management work like Windows because that's what they are used to, so if the experience is different than what they are used to they assume it doesn't work well. Going to some project's website and trying to find a download to install is not typically how you install software on Linux, and people distributing software like that for Linux probably don't know much about Linux software distribution themselves. If you want a good experience you should be installing software from the system package manager instead of searching for deb files that are probably out of date and won't work on your system due to shared library compatibility issues. Using the system package manager is much different than what many are used to but it actually works very well. The other option is to use flatpak or similar software, which is designed to sanely handle out of repo software installation. I think people distributing their own deb/rpm/etc files from their project's website are causing active harm and confusing people who are new to Linux. The best option is to provide a link to the distros package if it exists (https://archlinux.org/packages/foo https://archlinux.org/packages/foo), instructions on how to build from source and a flatpak image (or similar). When a new user downloads a stray deb and has a bad experience with it (broken software, system breakage, etc) it really leaves a poor impression on them that could have easily been avoided.
- n0w 5y ago
  I don't disagree with what you're saying, but it's interesting that some people might want to make Linux software distribution more like Windows or macOS because of unfamiliarity. The way you've described Linux software distribution sounds an aweful lot like software distribution on mobile devices. I think it should be pretty familiar to everyone by now. If anything I think Windows and macOS want to move closer to being like Linux in this regard. Maybe the experience of using cli tools like `apt` or `yum` has made people overlook the ease of installing software on Linux. Anyone that has used openSUSE or Ubuntu should know better.
southerntofu 5y ago
> there must be a way for a user to fulfill the expectation that they can select "Linux" instead of "Mac" and "Windows" when downloading software There's already established ways to do that such as AppImage, which has bonus points (compared to other solutions) for PGP signatures and differential (delta) upgrades. What's lacking is proper desktop environment integration for an ~/Apps folder like you have on MacOS where this pattern of one-file-per-app has been established for longer. If you want to go one step further, 0install would make it possible to not even have to choose between "Mac", "Windows" and "Linux" on the download page, which is kind of amazing in a way.
1_player 5y ago
Heard of Flatpak?

podge 5y ago

I agree with your point about fragmentation. But isn't the "Year Of The Linux Desktop" just a joke at this point? Even more so now that desktop computing is becoming less and less important to most people.

bee_rider 5y ago
Well, we can't look forward to "Year Of The Linux Phone," because that's been around for a while now in the form of Android. Maybe "Year Of The Actual, Like, Real Linux Phone, Ugh, You Know What I Mean," though?

ghostwriter 5y ago

There's no fragmentation, Nix apart from many other things is first of all a build system, and it can build Debian and/or RPM packages for you from the same sources it uses for NixOS [1] [1] https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Nixpkgs/Building_RPM_DEB_with_nixpkgs https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Nixpkgs/Building_RPM_DEB_with_nixpkg...

smoldesu 5y ago

The problem as I can see it is that the "solutions" don't really work either. Here's your options, in order of viability: - AppImage. Basically the idea of "Apps" ripped straight out of MacOS and injected right into Linux. Works fine, but clutters your home directory with Another Folder and doesn't integrate with your desktop like a native package. - Snap. Works on any system that can install snapd, is owned by Canonical (a pro or a con depending on who you ask), but also auto-updates and has occasional performance problems. Plus, snapd is generally kinda fussy. - Flatpak. Sandboxing taken to it's (il)logical extremes. If you like random data loss, confusing package manifests, low-performance and generally broken software, this is the way to go. Of course, most people like it when their compositor doesn't break when installing third-party programs, so they avoid it like the plauge. It's a uniquely bad format, almost worth spinning up a Linux VM to try it for a laugh. Just make sure to use GNOME, it's useless anywhere else. That's the true hallmark of a cross-distro packaging solution! So yeah, we're probably due in for Another Competing Standard. At this point though, I think most developers are contented to just ship an RPM and an Arch package and let everyone else figure stuff out for themselves. Honestly, I prefer that approach when compared to the blasted wasteland that is cross-distro package management.

3np 5y ago
Could you be more specific about your issues with Flatpak? No idea what you’re talking about here.
- 1_player 5y ago
  It's trolling of the "everything new in Linux is crap" type, just check their post history. Random data loss because one uses Flatpak, seriously?
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    > Random data loss because one uses Flatpak, seriously? I wish I was joking: https://twitter.com/planner_todo/status/1492084099875586049 https://twitter.com/planner_todo/status/1492084099875586049
    - 1_player 5y ago
      Ah because of a bug in an app (or it's packaging), the whole flatpak ecosystem is corrupt and causes data loss? How is that different that someone mistakingly causing an rm -rf /home in an RPM post-install script? Try again.
      - smoldesu 5y ago
        So now we're blaming developers for messing up with sandboxed systems? I really hope this isn't the rhetoric you use to convince people to start packaging with Flatpak...
        3np 5y ago
        You're the only one assigning blame to anyone here. Not all problems need a villain. Both of these things can be true at the same time: The library authors ultimately messed it up and could have prevented it by reading documentation better. Flatpak has a footgun and could have prevented it by better dev UX and/or structuring docs differently. Hopefully this incident is leading to improvements in both.

Ericson2314 5y ago

The major problem here is the lack of dialogue between language-specific package managers and distro package managers. I think once that is fixed, a lot of stuff will start improving. I wrote https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/109/ https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/109/ in hopes Nix can help lead the way here.

AlphaSite 5y ago
If this were true Mac and Windows wouldn’t thrive, but they do just fine without a system level package manager at all.
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  Err i was trying to answer > What I'm against is the general fragmentation of Linux that makes interoperability between distro's and window managers problematic. I disagree that downloading software being hard is a major impediment. (though I realize the parent did continue to claim that.) How many people download executables on the regular anyways?
- nick__m 5y ago
  Windows now has a first-party package manager: https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli It positively surprised me when I did `sudo winget upgrade` (I first did `winget install gerardog.gsudo` in an admin prompt) and it detected and upgraded the majority of the already installed OSS on my Windows workstation.

wheresmycraisin 5y ago

Aren't we past that? Vast majority of Linux desktops are Ubuntu/Debian or Redhat/Centos. You target those two and you're set. Add Suse if you have a large European user base.

3836293648 5y ago
Or just target flatpak and let it mostly just work

qbasic_forever 5y ago

Nix doesn't have anything to do with that problem. If anything it helps as it lets multiple even conflicting versions of libraries and software coexist and run together. What you want is flatpak or appimage (or even snap). These are self contained distributed binaries that contain and isolate all their dependencies. It is simply a one file download for any linux distro. They work great--I use a ton of flatpak apps like VS Code all the time.

contravariant 5y ago

You phrase this as if it's getting continually worse, but I'm not sure if distros were ever that interoperable (unless you deliberately restrict yourself to a point in time where there was exactly 1 distro). If anything it seems to me that you now have a decent chance to get software to run on any recent distro, which wasn't always the case. Though that's just my impression, I'd be happy to be proven wrong by someone better informed.

chlorion 5y ago

I am not so sure that this is really as big of a problem as it's made out to be. To me it seems like people trying to make Linux software management work like Windows because that's what they are used to, so if the experience is different than what they are used to they assume it doesn't work well. Going to some project's website and trying to find a download to install is not typically how you install software on Linux, and people distributing software like that for Linux probably don't know much about Linux software distribution themselves. If you want a good experience you should be installing software from the system package manager instead of searching for deb files that are probably out of date and won't work on your system due to shared library compatibility issues. Using the system package manager is much different than what many are used to but it actually works very well. The other option is to use flatpak or similar software, which is designed to sanely handle out of repo software installation. I think people distributing their own deb/rpm/etc files from their project's website are causing active harm and confusing people who are new to Linux. The best option is to provide a link to the distros package if it exists (https://archlinux.org/packages/foo https://archlinux.org/packages/foo), instructions on how to build from source and a flatpak image (or similar). When a new user downloads a stray deb and has a bad experience with it (broken software, system breakage, etc) it really leaves a poor impression on them that could have easily been avoided.

n0w 5y ago
I don't disagree with what you're saying, but it's interesting that some people might want to make Linux software distribution more like Windows or macOS because of unfamiliarity. The way you've described Linux software distribution sounds an aweful lot like software distribution on mobile devices. I think it should be pretty familiar to everyone by now. If anything I think Windows and macOS want to move closer to being like Linux in this regard. Maybe the experience of using cli tools like `apt` or `yum` has made people overlook the ease of installing software on Linux. Anyone that has used openSUSE or Ubuntu should know better.

southerntofu 5y ago

> there must be a way for a user to fulfill the expectation that they can select "Linux" instead of "Mac" and "Windows" when downloading software There's already established ways to do that such as AppImage, which has bonus points (compared to other solutions) for PGP signatures and differential (delta) upgrades. What's lacking is proper desktop environment integration for an ~/Apps folder like you have on MacOS where this pattern of one-file-per-app has been established for longer. If you want to go one step further, 0install would make it possible to not even have to choose between "Mac", "Windows" and "Linux" on the download page, which is kind of amazing in a way.

1_player 5y ago

Heard of Flatpak?