4 ms·

Maybe I should try it again, but last time I used it, I couldn't get programs to just work. I don't want to hate on ubuntu, I liked a lot about it, but so often

Maybe I should try it again, but last time I used it, I couldn't get programs to just work. I don't want to hate on ubuntu, I liked a lot about it, but so often you can't just install and use something, you have to do a bunch of fiddling. Last time I used it, I couldn't get Dropbox to install correctly. Sublime text would always open in the default spot and with the default window size rather than where I closed it. There are all of these very minuscule problems that add up to a very agitating experience. That's why I said it comes up excruciatingly short, I feel like Linux is almost the best OS on every level, yet on every level (above the command line) there's some little thing that's irritating.

kristopolous 13y ago
If you've been programming for a while, modifying software isn't as scary and intimidating as you'd think. For exmple, I had wpa_supplicant always crap out at a few coffee shops here in LA. It tried to associate but didn't wait long enough. I ran it with the "-v" option and saw a line that said something like: "Waiting 5 seconds". I downloaded the source code and searched for that message: grep -r Waiting * | grep second I got 5 results or so. I opened up the code and I saw a line like this, right above the debug message. timeout = 5000; I added a 0 (making it 50 seconds) and saved the file. I ran ./configure && make and killed /usr/bin/wpa_supplicant, then used my copy and like magic, it started working. Go me! I think any average non-wizard programmer could have probably done the same. I didn't have to know all any big-picture detail of wpa_supplicant's design nor did I have to know the 802.11[anything] protocol. No need to do packet dissection or anything like that. I looked at the screen, I grepped for where the problem was and I added a 0. Fixed. It took all of 20 minutes or so. A lot less time then the productivity I had already lost by putting up with the issue in the first place. [1] Those kinds of experiences are the kind that make me stick with linux. I have an identical problem with the same networks on my s3. I'm guessing it's because of the same thing. But my stock install of the developer-unfriendly OS has made the barrier to doing the same process much much higher. I had a different, but also easily solvable problem on a MBP once in 2012. I tried the same process. But the man pages were half a page long and dated 10 years ago. The developer documentation was non-existent, the source code was inaccessible, and everyone that was experiencing the problem were unsophisticated users who recommended things like "going to the mac store". Basically, I was stuck with the problem. I would have had to have been in my top form hacking zone to even find out what and where to mod; and then I'd have to write assembly to fix it; using tricks to maintain byte alignment, function pointers, all that noise. After a few experiences like that I realized the machine in my hands was a sophisticated consumer appliance. That's nice. But what I really wanted was a "feasibly reprogrammable" computer. --- [1] Here's another example: I had an idea for a way to switch application windows where you type in string matches of the window names, all these weird UI ideas... The problem was I couldn't program in X - I had no idea how to do that. Good thing is that I didn't need to. Because of the openness of the system, I was able to execute my idea with a perl script; calling programs to move around and manipulate windows. The existing tools gave me enough control, power, and information, in order to execute this sophisticated idea; and all without having to learn xlib (which I intend to do one day). It's become part of my must-have list for my long-term environments. Here's the link https://github.com/kristopolous/alttab https://github.com/kristopolous/alttab . I still don't know exactly how to create an x window. I'm convinced that although initially daunting, the "here's the blueprints" philosophy of linux actually makes sophisticated ideas simpler to execute, however counter-intuitive that sounds.
tacticus 13y ago
I think the sublime issue would occur if your ~/.config/sublime-text-$ver folder is borked additionally there are now packages for it so it installs very easily

kristopolous 13y ago

If you've been programming for a while, modifying software isn't as scary and intimidating as you'd think. For exmple, I had wpa_supplicant always crap out at a few coffee shops here in LA. It tried to associate but didn't wait long enough. I ran it with the "-v" option and saw a line that said something like: "Waiting 5 seconds". I downloaded the source code and searched for that message: grep -r Waiting * | grep second I got 5 results or so. I opened up the code and I saw a line like this, right above the debug message. timeout = 5000; I added a 0 (making it 50 seconds) and saved the file. I ran ./configure && make and killed /usr/bin/wpa_supplicant, then used my copy and like magic, it started working. Go me! I think any average non-wizard programmer could have probably done the same. I didn't have to know all any big-picture detail of wpa_supplicant's design nor did I have to know the 802.11[anything] protocol. No need to do packet dissection or anything like that. I looked at the screen, I grepped for where the problem was and I added a 0. Fixed. It took all of 20 minutes or so. A lot less time then the productivity I had already lost by putting up with the issue in the first place. [1] Those kinds of experiences are the kind that make me stick with linux. I have an identical problem with the same networks on my s3. I'm guessing it's because of the same thing. But my stock install of the developer-unfriendly OS has made the barrier to doing the same process much much higher. I had a different, but also easily solvable problem on a MBP once in 2012. I tried the same process. But the man pages were half a page long and dated 10 years ago. The developer documentation was non-existent, the source code was inaccessible, and everyone that was experiencing the problem were unsophisticated users who recommended things like "going to the mac store". Basically, I was stuck with the problem. I would have had to have been in my top form hacking zone to even find out what and where to mod; and then I'd have to write assembly to fix it; using tricks to maintain byte alignment, function pointers, all that noise. After a few experiences like that I realized the machine in my hands was a sophisticated consumer appliance. That's nice. But what I really wanted was a "feasibly reprogrammable" computer. --- [1] Here's another example: I had an idea for a way to switch application windows where you type in string matches of the window names, all these weird UI ideas... The problem was I couldn't program in X - I had no idea how to do that. Good thing is that I didn't need to. Because of the openness of the system, I was able to execute my idea with a perl script; calling programs to move around and manipulate windows. The existing tools gave me enough control, power, and information, in order to execute this sophisticated idea; and all without having to learn xlib (which I intend to do one day). It's become part of my must-have list for my long-term environments. Here's the link https://github.com/kristopolous/alttab https://github.com/kristopolous/alttab . I still don't know exactly how to create an x window. I'm convinced that although initially daunting, the "here's the blueprints" philosophy of linux actually makes sophisticated ideas simpler to execute, however counter-intuitive that sounds.

tacticus 13y ago

I think the sublime issue would occur if your ~/.config/sublime-text-$ver folder is borked additionally there are now packages for it so it installs very easily