3 ms·

Installing / uninstalling / updating software should be a service provided by the OS. Letting vendors do it themselves just gives them an opportunity to mess it

by jusssi 3y ago

Installing / uninstalling / updating software should be a service provided by the OS. Letting vendors do it themselves just gives them an opportunity to mess it up, and they frequently do.

all2 3y ago
This makes me think of the recent changes to pip on Arch Linux that recommend installing modules with pacman. Pacman is ok, but I recently destroyed the Ruby installation on a computer while trying to use Vagrant and other Ruby packages. I still haven't figured out how to fix it. Lesson learned, stick to AUR and pacman repo.
- notpushkin 3y ago
  Virtualenvs are your friend. I use pipx for Python utils not in my OS repos, never had a problem with that. (`pipx install yt-dlp` creates a venv in ~/.local/pipx/venvs, installs yt-dlp there, then symlinks the executables to ~/.local/bin.) For per-project dependencies, Poetry is pretty good, although there are other options too. For Ruby, I think Bundler is the venv/Poetry counterpart. Not sure what you could use for installing global tools though.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
kevingadd 3y ago
I can't speak for whether Apple gets it right, but my experiences with the various package managers on Linux have not been any better than my experiences with installers on Windows. I've settled for avoiding system packages for anything I can build from source since system packages are always outdated and often Strange, and I try to avoid third party package sources and weird stuff like Snap or Flatpak since it's also historically been a source of problems for me. Maybe life is better outside of the Debian sphere though, since I've only dealt with Ubuntu and Debian. Windows does have installer/uninstaller infrastructure called MSI (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/msi/windows-installer-portal https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/msi/windows-...), but ultimately it's up to developers to choose to use it.
- gdprrrr 3y ago
  I think part of it is that Debian and Ubuntu try to ship a good, usable default config, which is not necessarily the upstream default. I think it makes it hard to debug config issues.
- omgmajk 3y ago
  I don't quite get this, I've been using Debian-esque Linux since like 1997 in various forms and have had problems with apt-get/apt maybe five times since then in total and it's always fixable with a little work. I've seen this a lot and I've haven't really understood the problems. I saw Linus from LTT brick his installation (in Pop_OS! I think?) but that was a clear user error.
  - eddythompson80 3y ago
    YMMV. I just bricked a Debian install last month by using the package manager to install display drivers then trying to uninstall it to try a different driver. Had to go editing files in the console on a 4k display and just cross my fingers.
  - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
    >but that was a clear user error A user error that can happen to any user who isn't Linux savvy and just wants to paly games, and not learn how a package manager works, and that it can uninstall your desktop environment if you aren't proficient with Linux, is no user error but OS error. How many MacOS or Windows users expect that going through the installation steps of Steam, it can uninstall your desktop environment? For that user demographic, that is a clear OS issue.
    - pbhjpbhj 3y ago
      There was a Steam package error, the error warned it might be temporary, the installer said it wouldn't continue because that would remove "popos-desktop" amongst other things. So, he opened a console (like any user?), then used apt-get ... which had a WARNING ... "This should NOT be done unless you know exactly what you are doing!". He then had to type "Yes, do as I say!" in order to "do something potentially harmful" ... and then, what a surprise it did something harmful! That's a user error that will only happen to people who are cocky, people who are idiots, or people trying to firm up their long held stance that 'Linux isn't for gaming'. I saw the LTT video the following day to release, loaded a VM up, installed Pop_OS (my first time) and installed Steam, no issues. Very simple. All button clicking. >going through the installation steps of Steam // That's mis-characterisation, he went through the Steam install steps (click install by the Steam icon), the OS told him there was an error and refused to do it. End. Then he went sudo-ing and ignoring warnings. "You can delete System32 this OS isn't ready for users!". You'll tell me now installs never fail on Windows, presumably, despite having experienced them myself.
jeroenhd 3y ago
Windows provides various installer systems (.msi and the later iterations for UWP applications). It's unfortunate that MSI files aren't used more often, because they're more reliable than their uninstall.exe counterparts. They're not unlike .deb/.rpm files, except they integrate with the system GUI better when it comes to prompts and variables. I believe MSI files were originally supposed to be almost atomic in use (software is either installed or uninstalled), providing transactional operations for installing software and limited UI options. I remember (but can't find) an old quote from someone on the team that designed the file format, basically saying something among the lines of "giving developers the option to execute random commands from MSI installers was the worst decision we've made".

by jusssi 3y ago

Installing / uninstalling / updating software should be a service provided by the OS. Letting vendors do it themselves just gives them an opportunity to mess it up, and they frequently do.

all2 3y ago

This makes me think of the recent changes to pip on Arch Linux that recommend installing modules with pacman. Pacman is ok, but I recently destroyed the Ruby installation on a computer while trying to use Vagrant and other Ruby packages. I still haven't figured out how to fix it. Lesson learned, stick to AUR and pacman repo.

notpushkin 3y ago
Virtualenvs are your friend. I use pipx for Python utils not in my OS repos, never had a problem with that. (`pipx install yt-dlp` creates a venv in ~/.local/pipx/venvs, installs yt-dlp there, then symlinks the executables to ~/.local/bin.) For per-project dependencies, Poetry is pretty good, although there are other options too. For Ruby, I think Bundler is the venv/Poetry counterpart. Not sure what you could use for installing global tools though.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

kevingadd 3y ago

I can't speak for whether Apple gets it right, but my experiences with the various package managers on Linux have not been any better than my experiences with installers on Windows. I've settled for avoiding system packages for anything I can build from source since system packages are always outdated and often Strange, and I try to avoid third party package sources and weird stuff like Snap or Flatpak since it's also historically been a source of problems for me. Maybe life is better outside of the Debian sphere though, since I've only dealt with Ubuntu and Debian. Windows does have installer/uninstaller infrastructure called MSI (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/msi/windows-installer-portal https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/msi/windows-...), but ultimately it's up to developers to choose to use it.

gdprrrr 3y ago
I think part of it is that Debian and Ubuntu try to ship a good, usable default config, which is not necessarily the upstream default. I think it makes it hard to debug config issues.
omgmajk 3y ago
I don't quite get this, I've been using Debian-esque Linux since like 1997 in various forms and have had problems with apt-get/apt maybe five times since then in total and it's always fixable with a little work. I've seen this a lot and I've haven't really understood the problems. I saw Linus from LTT brick his installation (in Pop_OS! I think?) but that was a clear user error.
- eddythompson80 3y ago
  YMMV. I just bricked a Debian install last month by using the package manager to install display drivers then trying to uninstall it to try a different driver. Had to go editing files in the console on a 4k display and just cross my fingers.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  >but that was a clear user error A user error that can happen to any user who isn't Linux savvy and just wants to paly games, and not learn how a package manager works, and that it can uninstall your desktop environment if you aren't proficient with Linux, is no user error but OS error. How many MacOS or Windows users expect that going through the installation steps of Steam, it can uninstall your desktop environment? For that user demographic, that is a clear OS issue.
  - pbhjpbhj 3y ago
    There was a Steam package error, the error warned it might be temporary, the installer said it wouldn't continue because that would remove "popos-desktop" amongst other things. So, he opened a console (like any user?), then used apt-get ... which had a WARNING ... "This should NOT be done unless you know exactly what you are doing!". He then had to type "Yes, do as I say!" in order to "do something potentially harmful" ... and then, what a surprise it did something harmful! That's a user error that will only happen to people who are cocky, people who are idiots, or people trying to firm up their long held stance that 'Linux isn't for gaming'. I saw the LTT video the following day to release, loaded a VM up, installed Pop_OS (my first time) and installed Steam, no issues. Very simple. All button clicking. >going through the installation steps of Steam // That's mis-characterisation, he went through the Steam install steps (click install by the Steam icon), the OS told him there was an error and refused to do it. End. Then he went sudo-ing and ignoring warnings. "You can delete System32 this OS isn't ready for users!". You'll tell me now installs never fail on Windows, presumably, despite having experienced them myself.

jeroenhd 3y ago

Windows provides various installer systems (.msi and the later iterations for UWP applications). It's unfortunate that MSI files aren't used more often, because they're more reliable than their uninstall.exe counterparts. They're not unlike .deb/.rpm files, except they integrate with the system GUI better when it comes to prompts and variables. I believe MSI files were originally supposed to be almost atomic in use (software is either installed or uninstalled), providing transactional operations for installing software and limited UI options. I remember (but can't find) an old quote from someone on the team that designed the file format, basically saying something among the lines of "giving developers the option to execute random commands from MSI installers was the worst decision we've made".