3 ms·
> Wikipedia shares my assessment Everything is wrong with this statement but no, please educate yourself. > An operating system isn't a binary executable In
by pshirshov 1y ago
> Wikipedia shares my assessment
Everything is wrong with this statement but no, please educate yourself.
> An operating system isn't a binary executable
In many cases it exactly is a binary executable, but in some cases one may say that it's just a binary blob containing a filesystem image. If you can build with any level of reproducibility, you are doing great.
- vinceguidry 1y agoYou're not making your case very well, and claiming it to be a matter of education isn't helping. You can't just say someone is wrong without actually articulating why and expect to sound smart. Yes you can attempt to build operating systems in a manner that approaches the way you'd use to build an executable. But you're chasing after a moving target and there's not that much benefit in putting in the work, and the reason why is the exact thesis of the article. What you lack isn't education, it's experience. Experience to determine what is a good use of time and what doesn't matter. Experience to determine how to approach implementing ideas like reproducibility without shooting yourself in the foot, as the author did. Experience you gain by screwing it up and learning the lesson. It sounds to me like you screw stuff up and don't learn the lesson, leaving you to develop hard-headed idealistic positions like this one that you rely on in lieu of said experience.
- pshirshov 1y ago> You can't just say someone is wrong without actually articulating I can, I just did it. > But you're chasing after a moving target Please educate yourself. Read about bootstrap, hermeticity and reproducibility. Nix has a byte-to-byte reproducible core and that is very important and valuable.
- vinceguidry 1y agoNerd. > byte for byte reproducible core Whoop de doo. What about the other 9000 parts?