3 ms·

> But this is why Debian is so revered: they understand this dynamic and so maintain repositories that can be trusted. So you do understand my point about AUR.

by palata 1y ago

> But this is why Debian is so revered: they understand this dynamic and so maintain repositories that can be trusted. So you do understand my point about AUR. AUR is like adding a third-party repo to your Debian configuration. So it's not a good example if you want to talk about official repositories. Debian is a good example (it's not the only distribution that has that concept), which proves my point and not yours: this is better than unchecked repositories in terms of security. > Whereas the solution C/C++ cultists seem to implicitly prefer is having no repositories because dependencies are, at best, a slippery slope. Nobody says that ever. Either you make up your cult just to win an argument, or you don't understand what C/C++ people say. The whole goddamn point is to have a trusted system repository, and if you need to pull something that is not there, then you do it properly. Which is better than pulling random stuff from random repositories, again. > I actually prefer the dependencies-as-git-submodules approach Oh right. So you do it wrong, it's good to know and it will answer your next complaint: > Don't you just love it when one or more of your dependencies has a completely different build system to the others I don't give a damn because I handle dependencies properly (not as git submodules). I don't have a single project where the dependencies all use the same build system. It's just not a problem at all, because I do it properly. What do I do then? Well exactly the same as what your system package manager does. > this shouldn't be a problem. I agree with you. Call it a footgun if you wish, you are the one pulling the trigger. It isn't a problem for me. > why are any and all comments begging for a first-party package manager immediately swamped with strawmans about npm Where did I do that? > It's because of the cultism, and every npm exploit further entrenches it. It's because npm is a good example of what happens when it goes out of control. Pip has the same problem, and Rust as well. But npm seems to be the worse, I guess because it's used by more people?

Defletter 1y ago
Your defensiveness is completely hindering you and I cannot be bothered with that so here are some much needed clarifications: > I am not a C/C++ cultist at all, and I actually don't like C++ (the language) so much (I've worked with it for years). I, for one, do not love it when there is an exploit in a language package manager. If you do neither of those things then did it ever occur to you that this might not be about YOU? > I find it ironic that when I explain that my problem is that I want to be able to audit (and maintain, if necessary) my dependencies, the answer that comes suggests that I am incompetent and "inexpertly" doing my job. Yeah, hi, no you didn't explain that. You're probably mistaking me for someone else in some other conversation you had. The only comment of yours prior to mine in the thread is you saying "I can use pkg-config just fine." And again, you're thinking that I'm calling YOU incompetent, or even that I'm calling you incompetent. But okay, I'm sure your code never has bugs, never has memory issues, is never poorly designed or untested, that you can whip out an OpenGL alternative whatever in no time and it be just as stable and battle-tested, and to say otherwise must be calling you incompetent. That makes total sense. > AUR stands for "Arch User Repository". It's not the official system repository. > So it's not a good example if you want to talk about official repositories. I said system package, not official repository. I don't know why you keep insisting on countering an argument I did not make. Yes, system packages can be installed from unofficial repositories. I don't know how I could've made this clearer. -- Overall, getting bored of this, though the part where you harp on about doing dependencies properly compared to me and not elaborating one bit is very funny. Have a nice day.
- palata 1y ago
  > Your defensiveness Start by not calling everybody disagreeing with you a cultist, next time. > I said system package, not official repository. I don't know why you keep insisting on countering an argument I did not make. Yes, system packages can be installed from unofficial repositories. I don't know how I could've made this clearer. It's not that it is unclear, it's just that it doesn't make sense. When we compare npm to a system package manager in this context, the thing we compare is whether or not is it curated. Agreed, I was maybe not using the right words (I should have said curated package managers vs not curated package managers), but it did not occur to me that it was unclear because comparing npm to a system package manager makes no sense otherwise. It's all just installing binaries somewhere on disk. AUR is much like npm in that it is not curated. So if you find that it is a security problem: great! We agree! If you want to pull something from AUR, you should read its PKGBUILD first. And if it pulls tens of packages from AUR, you should think twice before you actually install it. Just like if someone tells you to do `curl https://some_website.com/some_script.sh https://some_website.com/some_script.sh | sudo sh`, no matter how convenient that is. Most Linux distributions have a curated repository, which is the default for the "system package manager". Obviously, if users add custom, not curated repositories, it's a security problem. AUR is a bad example because it isn't different from npm in that regard. > though the part where you harp on about doing dependencies properly compared to me and not elaborating one bit is very funny Well I did elaborate at least one bit, but I doubt you are interested in more details than what I wrote: "What do I do then? Well exactly the same as what your system package manager does." I install the dependencies somewhere (just like the system package manager does), and I let my build system find them. It could be with CMake's `find_package`, it could be with pkg-config, whatever knows how to find packages. There is no need to install the dependencies in the place where the system package manager installs stuff: it can go anywhere you want. And you just tell CMake or pkg-config or Meson or whatever you use to look there, too. Using git submodules is just a bad idea for many reasons, including the fact that you need all of them to use the same build system (which you mentioned), or that a clean build usually implies rebuilding the dependencies (for nothing) or that it doesn't work with package managers (system or not). And usually, projects that use git submodule only support that, without offering a way to use the system package(s).

by palata 1y ago

Defletter 1y ago

Your defensiveness is completely hindering you and I cannot be bothered with that so here are some much needed clarifications: > I am not a C/C++ cultist at all, and I actually don't like C++ (the language) so much (I've worked with it for years). I, for one, do not love it when there is an exploit in a language package manager. If you do neither of those things then did it ever occur to you that this might not be about YOU? > I find it ironic that when I explain that my problem is that I want to be able to audit (and maintain, if necessary) my dependencies, the answer that comes suggests that I am incompetent and "inexpertly" doing my job. Yeah, hi, no you didn't explain that. You're probably mistaking me for someone else in some other conversation you had. The only comment of yours prior to mine in the thread is you saying "I can use pkg-config just fine." And again, you're thinking that I'm calling YOU incompetent, or even that I'm calling you incompetent. But okay, I'm sure your code never has bugs, never has memory issues, is never poorly designed or untested, that you can whip out an OpenGL alternative whatever in no time and it be just as stable and battle-tested, and to say otherwise must be calling you incompetent. That makes total sense. > AUR stands for "Arch User Repository". It's not the official system repository. > So it's not a good example if you want to talk about official repositories. I said system package, not official repository. I don't know why you keep insisting on countering an argument I did not make. Yes, system packages can be installed from unofficial repositories. I don't know how I could've made this clearer. -- Overall, getting bored of this, though the part where you harp on about doing dependencies properly compared to me and not elaborating one bit is very funny. Have a nice day.

palata 1y ago
> Your defensiveness Start by not calling everybody disagreeing with you a cultist, next time. > I said system package, not official repository. I don't know why you keep insisting on countering an argument I did not make. Yes, system packages can be installed from unofficial repositories. I don't know how I could've made this clearer. It's not that it is unclear, it's just that it doesn't make sense. When we compare npm to a system package manager in this context, the thing we compare is whether or not is it curated. Agreed, I was maybe not using the right words (I should have said curated package managers vs not curated package managers), but it did not occur to me that it was unclear because comparing npm to a system package manager makes no sense otherwise. It's all just installing binaries somewhere on disk. AUR is much like npm in that it is not curated. So if you find that it is a security problem: great! We agree! If you want to pull something from AUR, you should read its PKGBUILD first. And if it pulls tens of packages from AUR, you should think twice before you actually install it. Just like if someone tells you to do `curl https://some_website.com/some_script.sh https://some_website.com/some_script.sh | sudo sh`, no matter how convenient that is. Most Linux distributions have a curated repository, which is the default for the "system package manager". Obviously, if users add custom, not curated repositories, it's a security problem. AUR is a bad example because it isn't different from npm in that regard. > though the part where you harp on about doing dependencies properly compared to me and not elaborating one bit is very funny Well I did elaborate at least one bit, but I doubt you are interested in more details than what I wrote: "What do I do then? Well exactly the same as what your system package manager does." I install the dependencies somewhere (just like the system package manager does), and I let my build system find them. It could be with CMake's `find_package`, it could be with pkg-config, whatever knows how to find packages. There is no need to install the dependencies in the place where the system package manager installs stuff: it can go anywhere you want. And you just tell CMake or pkg-config or Meson or whatever you use to look there, too. Using git submodules is just a bad idea for many reasons, including the fact that you need all of them to use the same build system (which you mentioned), or that a clean build usually implies rebuilding the dependencies (for nothing) or that it doesn't work with package managers (system or not). And usually, projects that use git submodule only support that, without offering a way to use the system package(s).