|
Symbolic Butt posted:I've been using ubuntu and debian exclusively for idk how long. in my home mostly ubuntu with awesomewm because I didn't care really. like infernal machines said, I never dist-upgrade lol ubuntu is broken the moment you enable universe/multiverse. the non-canonical repos are a shitshow of unpatched and/or hilariously broken "community" packages that replace debian packages at random. of course, all the software people actually want to use is in those known-bad repos result: as a ubuntu user, your system is riddled with security holes and breakage from day one.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 15:58 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 23:34 |
|
"long term support" is a laughable idea in a distribution where 95% of the packages are permanently unsupported and six months old on release day
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 15:59 |
|
oh yeah, the best part, i almost forgot: universe/multiverse are enabled by default ubuntu is broken and unsupportable out of the box
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 16:01 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:Wait, what? You tell your customers running old LTSes that you aren't going to backport patches to it and to upgrade to the newest LTS as soon as it's available? This isn't necessarily out of laziness either -- a lot of what users might consider "normal fixes" require new upstream versions of dependent libraries. Which, in turn, requires upgrading to a newer stable LTS release. quote:How is that in any way an LTS? I backport patches to RHEL5 every week. It loving sucks, but I do it because that's the contract the customer signed. I think the thing to understand here is that "most" of Ubuntu is community developers and the universe archive (and stuff inherited from Debian), it's not the Canonical employees supporting Main. So when I talk in generalities I'm not talking about the stuff you pay for.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 20:27 |
|
scientific linux 6 comes with installations of texlive from 2007 and it is a 5gb install to update, and it is a pain in the rear end linux is a pain in the rear end
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 20:28 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:The issue is that they're still running scripts as root that make untracked changes to your operating system. Yes, that could be updating a font or icon cache, but you're still left with files on your system with no way to rollback. quote:Well, you can repair it, but that means digging through poo poo in /etc/ that nobody should ever care about. Why the gently caress are config file migrations done with sed and awk in Ubuntu? I do agree in principle that package installs shouldn't make changes to files in "permanent" areas of the filesystem (this is in part why we have FHS) unless they can be equivalently removed upon package removal. That's one reason why configuration slowly moves from conf files to various .d folders where each package can dump something instead of appending to a file. ShadowHawk fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Mar 22, 2014 |
# ? Mar 22, 2014 20:33 |
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:ubuntu is broken the moment you enable universe/multiverse. the non-canonical repos are a shitshow of unpatched and/or hilariously broken "community" packages that replace debian packages at random. of course, all the software people actually want to use is in those known-bad repos Just today I made one of those "random changes" to the debian winetricks package. The debian maintainer had decided to include a patch he authored that prevents the program from running unless you give it the --gui command line option. No, he didn't update the .desktop launcher to include that.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 20:39 |
|
Right, that's what I mean by "dropfiles". I actually wasn't pecking and hunting around various packages until I found one. I was writing patches for accountsservice the other day, so it was literally just the first package I thought to check. You were talking about how most every package had stuff done through debhelper, but yet I only needed one for a counter-example. I didn't bother to check any others, so maybe I just hit a bad sample. That said, what's the long-term plan here? Are they going to have a flag day where every package must be always using debhelper for everything?
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 20:42 |
|
ShadowHawk posted:Are you one of those "any package changed from debian is bad" nits? My mantra is "any patch not upstream or backported from upstream is bad". The Debian guy was an idiot and reverting back to upstream through your patches is fine.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 20:43 |
|
And I know that debbugs is a gigantic pile of incredible fun, but you should probably file a bug about that in the Debian package if you haven't already. I am a bit curious as to the validity of packaging winetricks though. It's a giant shell script that you can just wget, right?
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 20:45 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:My mantra is "any patch not upstream or backported from upstream is bad". The Debian guy was an idiot and reverting back to upstream through your patches is fine. The second exception is the pulseaudio patches I apply to Wine. This is a fairly significant change. Upstream does not believe in them and has been doing a sound rework for years and years and it still doesn't work as a native pulse backend, which is absolutely needed by some users I've met firsthand (and generally appreciated by all users, somewhat regular complaints about wine sound dropping have basically disappeared since I did this move). But in winepulse's case, it's cause I've got a developer actively maintaining the patches who helps me maintain the Wine package (and I helped him get him a job at Canonical so I know he'll stick around) Orphaned non-upstream patches should generally die though.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 20:51 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:And I know that debbugs is a gigantic pile of incredible fun, but you should probably file a bug about that in the Debian package if you haven't already.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 20:53 |
|
Ah, cool. The last time I fiddled around with winetricks was 2009 or so. And yeah, if an upstream maintainer says "well do that downstream", sure, apply those patches. We also apply winepulse in Fedora as well. The sound API rewrite has been going on for centuries. I'm more talking about stuff like this: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/dhcp.git/tree/ where we effectively have our own fork of dhcpcd and nobody actually cares enough to try to get the ISC to take those patches.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 21:05 |
|
ShadowHawk posted:The second exception is the pulseaudio patches I apply to Wine. This is a fairly significant change. Upstream does not believe in them and has been doing a sound rework for years and years and it still doesn't work as a native pulse backend, which is absolutely needed by some users I've met firsthand (and generally appreciated by all users, somewhat regular complaints about wine sound dropping have basically disappeared since I did this move). yeah this is the kind of thing i'm talking about when i say the community repos are full of random bullshit
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 21:28 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:Ah, cool. The last time I fiddled around with winetricks was 2009 or so. context is important. when red hat does something funny to upstream, whatever red hat is doing is now the standard. when some fuckwit with a launchpad.net account does something funny, it's just another way ubuntu is broken.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 21:30 |
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:context is important. when red hat does something funny to upstream, whatever red hat is doing is now the standard. http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/wine.git/tree/wine-pulse-1.7.11.patch we apply the exact same patch that they do. it's broken for them, but also the standard?
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 21:37 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/wine.git/tree/wine-pulse-1.7.11.patch yep. gee it's funny how being the only vendor who matters vs a bored hobbyist changes the context!
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 21:57 |
|
spankmeister posted:That looks like a script i would make which means it's really bad. yeah
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 21:57 |
|
if red hat does it, it doesn't matter if it's stupid, the whole world is gonna have to pick it up anyway see also: systemd, gnome3
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 22:02 |
|
hm yes the only reason systemd was adopted was because of the Red Hat Cabal and not because it solves a bunch of problems we've had with traditional init systems yes
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 22:08 |
|
lol at people real mad about systemd
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 22:21 |
|
i unironically miss smf
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 22:32 |
|
ShadowHawk posted:Wine question: Have you heard of wine-pipelight and will the patches in there ever make it to upstream Wine? Valeyard posted:scientific linux 6 comes with installations of texlive from 2007 and it is a 5gb install to update, and it is a pain in the rear end don't use scientific linux
|
# ? Mar 22, 2014 23:29 |
|
current linix status: compared to centos and ubuntu gnome, I'm liking fedora better already
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 00:20 |
|
Let me know if you have any issues with it. It's nowhere near perfect, we know.
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 00:31 |
|
what's so bad about arch anyway? it seems like they more or less save you the trouble of compiling poo poo from scratch and otherwise get out of your way. the advent of systemd erased a lot of "distribution" bullshit and homogenised a lot of trivial arbitrary poo poo to be the same across all linuxes, which is worth it even before you get into the whole reliable scriptable service management and queryable syslog thing.
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 01:01 |
|
Mr Dog posted:what's so bad about arch anyway? it seems like they more or less save you the trouble of compiling poo poo from scratch and otherwise get out of your way. My main gripe with arch is huge system changes every so often that if you miss them youre gonna have problems updating. I ran it on an old laptop that i used once every two to three weeks and every single time i wanted to use it i had to cj my drat system because they decided /var is deprecated and it should live in /usr/var with a symlink back or whatever. You'd go pacman -Syu and it would throw a fit. Also a related issue is untracked files in directories pacman wants to do something with. I think i did the syslinux switch one time and it all went to poo poo because i had a bunch of old kernels in /boot that, although installed by pacman, were no longer tracked by pacman for whatever reason so it threw up its arms and said gently caress it. gently caress pacman seriously. Don't even get me started about the aur
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 01:28 |
|
spankmeister posted:My main gripe with arch is huge system changes every so often that if you miss them youre gonna have problems updating. I ran it on an old laptop that i used once every two to three weeks and every single time i wanted to use it i had to cj my drat system because they decided /var is deprecated and it should live in /usr/var with a symlink back or whatever. You'd go pacman -Syu and it would throw a fit. yep basically this, exactly. that was 100% of my issue with arch. and it's 'working as intended wontfix' because they idea is that you're supposed to cj your system and read documentation otherwise arch isnt right for you or whatever. maybe it's better now but i'll never find out because i'm too lazy to install it now that they've gotten rid of the install gui
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 01:34 |
|
Valeyard posted:scientific linux 6 comes with installations of texlive from 2007 and it is a 5gb install to update, and it is a pain in the rear end scientific linux is poo poo last time i had to use it you couldnt even get modern versions of gsl or scipy without building everything from blas up manually
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 01:41 |
|
I not an Arch zealot or anything, and actually it's the only linux I have, but I wanted to turn an older piece of hardware into a midi controller, and had some other custom config I needed and it's been great for that. Plus they threw in an easter egg that makes it so pacman has a little pacman chewing dots on the progress bar when you install stuff and that's just fun. That's my Arch story anyways thanks for reading
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 01:45 |
|
you could do worse than arch
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 01:47 |
|
My issue with Arch is not only that it gets stale very quickly, but the community seems to be extremely hostile when you need to fix it. I went into #archlinux once when my computer wouldn't boot after an update and all they did was convince me that Arch is for hipsters only, not for anybody who wants to get poo poo done. They told me to read the wiki and the manual and the news posts, but none of those things actually helped me fix my drat computer. It actually turned out that it my issue wasn't documented anywhere on the wiki, or the manual, or the news posts. I forget what the actual issue was, but it was an edge case in pacman not upgrading something correctly. It was their bug, and I eventually filed a bug on their bug tracker and they fixed it. But of course the community can't let somebody besmirch the good name of our Arch, our Pacman and the Holy AUR. It's 100% perfect, just read the wiki and manual and news posts you loving idiot.
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 01:50 |
|
Breakfast All Day posted:scientific linux is poo poo spankmeister posted:don't use scientific linux its what we use in our lab machines at the university so i use it in the house just to be consistent and so i dont need to spend 30 minutes trying to figure out how to do something in some other distro everything about our computer setup is really bad being forced to host our git repos on an internal server that can only be accessed on campus jenkins is also hosted on that same server and has so many problems
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 01:52 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:My issue with Arch is not only that it gets stale very quickly, but the community seems to be extremely hostile when you need to fix it.
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 02:04 |
|
spankmeister posted:question: Have you heard of wine-pipelight and will the patches in there ever make it to upstream Wine?
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 02:09 |
|
arch really hasn't broken itself in a long time (check the front page, all the announcements there are all pretty minor) the aur is the killer feature for me. dealing with custom repos and PPAs is really terrible. admittedly, the aur isn't perfect, but you have a greater chance of the package not completely disappearing because someone got bored or banned from launchpad
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 03:44 |
|
for anyone who thinks building from the aur is bad hasn't found pacaur.
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 03:45 |
|
oval office AND PASTE posted:for anyone who thinks building from the aur is bad hasn't found pacaur. Is that one of those AUR wrappers that they tell you never to use because of security issues because packages have to build as root?
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 03:59 |
|
yes i'm sure the developers didn't think of that at all
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 04:09 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 23:34 |
|
it compiles as the user and then installs through sudo, it even prompts and asks if you'd like to check the PKGBUILD script for maliciousness. basically, it's 100% like doing it manually.
|
# ? Mar 23, 2014 04:10 |