3 ms·

I find it odd that people use extra management software for their dotfiles. Most of the files are in `~/.config` anyways, so you can track this folder like a re

I find it odd that people use extra management software for their dotfiles. Most of the files are in `~/.config` anyways, so you can track this folder like a regular directory in git. And for the software that does insist on writing into `~` directly you can set up symlinks, with a script or manually.

twp 4y ago
Tracking `~/.config` as a regular directory in git only works if all your machines are near-identical. If you want to share dotfiles between, say, Linux and macOS, or between your home and work machines, then a dotfile manager makes it much much easier. For more reasons, see: https://www.chezmoi.io/why-use-chezmoi/ https://www.chezmoi.io/why-use-chezmoi/ Disclaimer: I'm the author of chezmoi
- vivab0rg 4y ago
  Unrelated, but thank you for chezmoi, it's a clever little utility very well designed. I use it to manage many distinct Arch-based systems and soon will be moving my Ubuntu servers to it. Congratulations!
  - twp 4y ago
    Thank you <3
yunohn 4y ago
> I find it odd that people use extra management software for their dotfiles > you can set up symlinks, with a script or manually. So yeah… that’s exactly what dotfile managers do with standardised scripts.
- blueflow 4y ago
  Except they are, themselves, a new dependency. And might even introduce more dependencies themselves.
  - 9935c101ab17a66 4y ago
    I mean, maybe? But they could just be a binary. Also, is writing your own scripts to symlink appropriate dot files across different environments not also a new dependency?
    - blueflow 4y ago
      You can ship a portable shell script with your config files. Portable shell script is supported out-of-the-box everywhere where you have dotfiles. No extra installing necessary. Contrast this to binaries, which are not portable and need to be re-generated for every possible architecture and ABI.
      - yunohn 4y ago
        > which are not portable and need to be re-generated for every possible architecture and ABI. I mean we’re talking about Linux dotfiles. At worst, you might need a binary for arm, if amd64 isn’t enough. I’m not clear on your point about ABI incompatibility for simple binaries.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        blueflow 4y ago
        Its still work to be done. Thats something that is not even an /issue/ if you dont need much except the tools that already come with your distribution. Like, i think its best to wait like, 10 years, and see how the whole thing worked out. Maybe we need another systemd or two until people realize that software is still a liability even if you aren't the one who is maintaining it.
        yunohn 4y ago
        I would recommend checking out GNU Stow, I’m quite happy with it - super straightforward to use.

twp 4y ago

Tracking `~/.config` as a regular directory in git only works if all your machines are near-identical. If you want to share dotfiles between, say, Linux and macOS, or between your home and work machines, then a dotfile manager makes it much much easier. For more reasons, see: https://www.chezmoi.io/why-use-chezmoi/ https://www.chezmoi.io/why-use-chezmoi/ Disclaimer: I'm the author of chezmoi

vivab0rg 4y ago
Unrelated, but thank you for chezmoi, it's a clever little utility very well designed. I use it to manage many distinct Arch-based systems and soon will be moving my Ubuntu servers to it. Congratulations!
- twp 4y ago
  Thank you <3

yunohn 4y ago

> I find it odd that people use extra management software for their dotfiles > you can set up symlinks, with a script or manually. So yeah… that’s exactly what dotfile managers do with standardised scripts.

blueflow 4y ago
Except they are, themselves, a new dependency. And might even introduce more dependencies themselves.
- 9935c101ab17a66 4y ago
  I mean, maybe? But they could just be a binary. Also, is writing your own scripts to symlink appropriate dot files across different environments not also a new dependency?
  - blueflow 4y ago
    You can ship a portable shell script with your config files. Portable shell script is supported out-of-the-box everywhere where you have dotfiles. No extra installing necessary. Contrast this to binaries, which are not portable and need to be re-generated for every possible architecture and ABI.
    - yunohn 4y ago
      > which are not portable and need to be re-generated for every possible architecture and ABI. I mean we’re talking about Linux dotfiles. At worst, you might need a binary for arm, if amd64 isn’t enough. I’m not clear on your point about ABI incompatibility for simple binaries.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - blueflow 4y ago
        Its still work to be done. Thats something that is not even an /issue/ if you dont need much except the tools that already come with your distribution. Like, i think its best to wait like, 10 years, and see how the whole thing worked out. Maybe we need another systemd or two until people realize that software is still a liability even if you aren't the one who is maintaining it.
        yunohn 4y ago
        I would recommend checking out GNU Stow, I’m quite happy with it - super straightforward to use.