> Because it breaks the universe? It does not. People use packages that has binary patches applied all the time, and they work just fine. The issues you linke

> Because it breaks the universe? It does not. People use packages that has binary patches applied all the time, and they work just fine. The issues you linked to refers to a fixable issue that's completely unrelated to binary patching. It's what happens when you directly use the linker without supplying the required flags. > patchelf is a working hack short term, but what's the long term solution? Patching binaries isn't a short term solution. It's the only solution for retargeting proprietary binaries to make it run on distros it wasn't built for. Besides, making a few edits to ELF metadata isn't the end of the world. It's the universally accepted solution across distros. > I mean, if a simple error message change can sit open for more than a year, is there really any hope for fixing anything truly substantial? My point still stands. All software other than the most trivial ones has non-zero number of unresolved issues at any given moment in time. This is true even for software made by multi-billion dollar companies. Yet you seem to expect much more from a volunteer-run project with limited resources. You have a legitimate point regarding flakes, except that issues are constantly being fixed. It's just that some issues you happen to care about are receiving less attention than you'd like given the limited amount of resources available.