3 ms·

Even though macOS won’t let you replace the actual binaries that ship with the OS, you can still replace the binaries that get resolved when they’re called via

by dagmx 2y ago

Even though macOS won’t let you replace the actual binaries that ship with the OS, you can still replace the binaries that get resolved when they’re called via brew/nix/macports etc. I again disagree with your assertions that you need to replace the OS contents. You just need to be able to reflow them to other ones. That’s the macOS way, the flatpak way etc.. I think the issue is that you are claiming that you MUST be able to do these things on Linux, and I’d push back and say no you do not. And your comparison of SteamOS to a console or in car entertainment is flat out incorrect. Have you never booted it into desktop mode? For 90% of users, what are you expecting they need to do in that mode that it’s not “general purpose” enough to do? Yes, it’s not impossible. It’s been done multiple times , successfully as well.

bayindirh 2y ago
> you can still replace the binaries that get resolved when they’re called via brew/nix/macports etc. Yes, but this doesn't make my point invalid and irrelevant. $PATH overriding is as old as this planet itself, and its primary purpose is not to make immutable systems more user-friendly. It's just a way to use your own binaries if you want to override itself. Being able to use flatpak, etc. on a system doesn't and won't allow you to change the core OS. Being able to reflow things doesn't solve anything about system management, esp. on the long run. > I think the issue is that you are claiming that you MUST be able to do these things on Linux, and I’d push back and say no you do not. I'll politely won't move and say that it depends. If you're building appliances or embedded systems, that might be discussed if there's an absolute requirement to remove the update mechanism, but for a server and end-user system which can live more than a decade, this is a core requirement which can't even be discussed, full stop. > And your comparison of SteamOS to a console or in car entertainment is flat out incorrect. I don't think so. > Have you never booted it into desktop mode? For 90% of users, what are you expecting they need to do in that mode that it’s not “general purpose” enough to do? No, but even Valve doesn't say what you say. What Valve says is "Users should not consider SteamOS as a replacement for their desktop operating system. SteamOS is being designed and optimized for the living room experience." (emphasis mine) [0] Its desktop mode is akin to Browser sessions present in consoles, or "Other OS" which used to be in Playstation. IOW, a nicety, not a feature. > Yes, it’s not impossible. It’s been done multiple times , successfully as well. Yes, to answer different set of requirements with set of different features. We still have a long way to go with "An immutable, daily driveable, desktop and server distribution which can be maintained, used and updated for a decade" (a-la Debian). [0]: https://store.steampowered.com/steamos https://store.steampowered.com/steamos

by dagmx 2y ago

bayindirh 2y ago

> you can still replace the binaries that get resolved when they’re called via brew/nix/macports etc. Yes, but this doesn't make my point invalid and irrelevant. $PATH overriding is as old as this planet itself, and its primary purpose is not to make immutable systems more user-friendly. It's just a way to use your own binaries if you want to override itself. Being able to use flatpak, etc. on a system doesn't and won't allow you to change the core OS. Being able to reflow things doesn't solve anything about system management, esp. on the long run. > I think the issue is that you are claiming that you MUST be able to do these things on Linux, and I’d push back and say no you do not. I'll politely won't move and say that it depends. If you're building appliances or embedded systems, that might be discussed if there's an absolute requirement to remove the update mechanism, but for a server and end-user system which can live more than a decade, this is a core requirement which can't even be discussed, full stop. > And your comparison of SteamOS to a console or in car entertainment is flat out incorrect. I don't think so. > Have you never booted it into desktop mode? For 90% of users, what are you expecting they need to do in that mode that it’s not “general purpose” enough to do? No, but even Valve doesn't say what you say. What Valve says is "Users should not consider SteamOS as a replacement for their desktop operating system. SteamOS is being designed and optimized for the living room experience." (emphasis mine) [0] Its desktop mode is akin to Browser sessions present in consoles, or "Other OS" which used to be in Playstation. IOW, a nicety, not a feature. > Yes, it’s not impossible. It’s been done multiple times , successfully as well. Yes, to answer different set of requirements with set of different features. We still have a long way to go with "An immutable, daily driveable, desktop and server distribution which can be maintained, used and updated for a decade" (a-la Debian). [0]: https://store.steampowered.com/steamos https://store.steampowered.com/steamos