3 ms·
How hard is to install it though? That doesn't sound like a reason not to use it.
by shmerl 2y ago
How hard is to install it though? That doesn't sound like a reason not to use it.
- throwaway55533 2y agoMitigating the risk of downloading a script from the internet and executing it -- even from a "trusted" website or package manager -- is absolutely a good reason not to use it.
- shmerl 2y agoAny decent distro has it. So you don't need to execute any random scripts, just install it or prepare the image with it for your OS install. That's it. I don't really get this whole defaults being a blocker for tools choice.
- paulddraper 2y agoSignificantly harder than doing nothing
- asa400 2y agoDepends on you, your team, your target hardware/os, your project, and many other factors. Considering all of those things, the hurdle of installation might just be too large for it to be worth it.
- theshrike79 2y agoIf a client has certified a specific Linux distro as an approved platform, that's what we use. We can either deliver a single executable (Go) or a Python script, as python is preinstalled on their distro. If we'd want to use Ruby, it'd be a huge hassle of re-certifying crap and bureauracy and approvals and in that time we'd have the Python solution already running.
- oopsallmagic 2y agoIt's not. This is a non-issue. Every web shop is writing bash to twiddle a build script on servers they also manage, which includes the ability to install any package they want.
- throwaway7ahgb 2y agoHow hard is it to install anything? That really isn't the point.
- shmerl 2y agoSeems like a lot below and around bring this as the main point for not using it. Which doesn't make sense to me.
- Qem 2y agoWithout a root account or inclusion in sudoers list, quite hard. There's millions of people that don't control the machines they work and spend most time with.