4 ms·

Hot Damn! Is that what is happening! I've been experiencing this with SublimeText and VSCode! I've taken screenshots, and a video, but had not submitted any

Hot Damn! Is that what is happening! I've been experiencing this with SublimeText and VSCode! I've taken screenshots, and a video, but had not submitted any bug reports yet. Whenever I make a new file, say 'foo.html.haml' the system will append .h to the file. I'd guessed it was a system wide issue, and uninstalled the new XCode just on the off chance, but that made no difference. Maybe Apple should have held back the Sequoia release like they often do! Edit: These sorts of ridiculous issues are not doing anything to stop me considering moving my dev environment to Linux full time :-/

righthand 2y ago
It’s great over here in the Linux world, I run Debian and Arch. Arch may give you regressions, but Debian is pretty smooth sailing functionally.
- sevensor 2y ago
  Maybe I’m getting old, but my long time preference for Arch is slowly being overtaken by my appreciation for Debian. It’s not the usual complaint about stability — I’ve had one issue in a dozen years with Arch — I just reached a point where I feel like I’m living in the future running Linux software from five years ago, so maybe I don’t need to upgrade quite so relentlessly. Anything I don’t have, I can compile.
  - righthand 2y ago
    What Debian has nailed in the last 10 years is the package management situation that is so smooth. This is why I’m leaving Arch, everything breaks sometimes or a dep won’t upgrade for this or that reason. Debian you install and the package probably has a pretty good initial config and works. Any packages that aren’t recent enough can be built usually because the toolchain versions are probably recent enough. So it really is a nice experience. Not even Apple products have that solid of a package situation.
    - lmpdev 2y ago
      Aren’t Debian and Arch philosophic opposites though? Arch is bleeding edge yet permanently issue prone, Debian is stable and conservative/slow in updating? Seems odd to jump from one end of the spectrum to another (I use Debian and Mint mostly but have respect for the Arch project’s aims)
      - QasimK 2y ago
        In the five years I have used Arch, I have not had a single issue.
      - ReleaseCandidat 2y ago
        > Debian is stable and conservative/slow in updating? Sid isn't.
      - sevensor 2y ago
        > Arch is bleeding edge yet permanently issue prone What were you doing with Arch where you had this experience? I’ve been using it for more than ten years on a variety of hardware and everything has always just worked, but I see this complaint a lot and I’m confused about where it comes from.
      - righthand 2y ago
        Oh I can’t change distros now because of philosophy?
    - aleden 2y ago
      I always have such a difficult time messing with packages on debian. On arch, there is a single PKGBUILD file, and it's basically the simplest thing anyone could think of which makes it bliss to work with. On the other hand, debian/rules is a complete mess, apt-get update is notoriously slow, and I have not had good experiences with dpkg-buildpackage compared to makepkg.
      - righthand 2y ago
        Really? I have had package manager failing experiences since I installed Arch. About 1-3 times per month yay will fail requiring me to use pacman to update. Once I run pacman I can run yay to update my AUR deps when the selling point of yay is that it’s a completely pacman-compatible interface. It’s package situation is so fuzzy though that the community actively encourages you to install multiple package managers. There’s a 3rd pm I can’t remember the name, just a lot of effort for simple things. Often the advice is to read the wiki pages which is nice but Debian I rarely have to read a wiki page or search because everything installs with sane defaults, doesn’t require building for the most part, doesn’t ask me if I want to keep make dependencies when I do build with a default to yes. Arch leaves files behind when I uninstall. Arch doesn't let me know I have extra dependencies I don’t need. Pacman requires reading quite a bit of manpages to understand how to do simple tasks. Arch just feels like a messy experience.

righthand 2y ago

It’s great over here in the Linux world, I run Debian and Arch. Arch may give you regressions, but Debian is pretty smooth sailing functionally.

sevensor 2y ago
Maybe I’m getting old, but my long time preference for Arch is slowly being overtaken by my appreciation for Debian. It’s not the usual complaint about stability — I’ve had one issue in a dozen years with Arch — I just reached a point where I feel like I’m living in the future running Linux software from five years ago, so maybe I don’t need to upgrade quite so relentlessly. Anything I don’t have, I can compile.
- righthand 2y ago
  What Debian has nailed in the last 10 years is the package management situation that is so smooth. This is why I’m leaving Arch, everything breaks sometimes or a dep won’t upgrade for this or that reason. Debian you install and the package probably has a pretty good initial config and works. Any packages that aren’t recent enough can be built usually because the toolchain versions are probably recent enough. So it really is a nice experience. Not even Apple products have that solid of a package situation.
  - lmpdev 2y ago
    Aren’t Debian and Arch philosophic opposites though? Arch is bleeding edge yet permanently issue prone, Debian is stable and conservative/slow in updating? Seems odd to jump from one end of the spectrum to another (I use Debian and Mint mostly but have respect for the Arch project’s aims)
    - QasimK 2y ago
      In the five years I have used Arch, I have not had a single issue.
    - ReleaseCandidat 2y ago
      > Debian is stable and conservative/slow in updating? Sid isn't.
    - sevensor 2y ago
      > Arch is bleeding edge yet permanently issue prone What were you doing with Arch where you had this experience? I’ve been using it for more than ten years on a variety of hardware and everything has always just worked, but I see this complaint a lot and I’m confused about where it comes from.
    - righthand 2y ago
      Oh I can’t change distros now because of philosophy?
  - aleden 2y ago
    I always have such a difficult time messing with packages on debian. On arch, there is a single PKGBUILD file, and it's basically the simplest thing anyone could think of which makes it bliss to work with. On the other hand, debian/rules is a complete mess, apt-get update is notoriously slow, and I have not had good experiences with dpkg-buildpackage compared to makepkg.
    - righthand 2y ago
      Really? I have had package manager failing experiences since I installed Arch. About 1-3 times per month yay will fail requiring me to use pacman to update. Once I run pacman I can run yay to update my AUR deps when the selling point of yay is that it’s a completely pacman-compatible interface. It’s package situation is so fuzzy though that the community actively encourages you to install multiple package managers. There’s a 3rd pm I can’t remember the name, just a lot of effort for simple things. Often the advice is to read the wiki pages which is nice but Debian I rarely have to read a wiki page or search because everything installs with sane defaults, doesn’t require building for the most part, doesn’t ask me if I want to keep make dependencies when I do build with a default to yes. Arch leaves files behind when I uninstall. Arch doesn't let me know I have extra dependencies I don’t need. Pacman requires reading quite a bit of manpages to understand how to do simple tasks. Arch just feels like a messy experience.