🪿

  • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Fortunately we do have a steady influx of new people incl. those who demand shit to god damn work, finally shifting this notion.

    For the time being we still have to resort to using the Windows version and Wine for old software though… But I already had the situation where the (unmaintained but working) app also had a Flatpak which was last updated many years ago and it just worked, which made me incredibly happy and hopeful. ❤️

    Good thing there’s a battle-proven response if people don’t like this because it’s “not what Linux is supposed to be” or some other nonsense: If you don’t like it just fork it yourself. 😚

    • qqq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Fortunately we do have a steady influx of new people incl. those who demand shit to god damn work, finally shifting this notion.

      What the hell is going on in this thread? Linux has been being actively developed by people who want “shit to god damn work” forever. What are the concrete examples of things that don’t work? Old games? Is that the problem here? These things that were developed for the locked in Windows ecosystem since time immemorial and never ran on Linux and now, through all of the work of the Linux ecosystem, do, by some miracle, run on Linux. It’s amazing that these things work at all: they were never intended to!

      • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        What the hell is going on in this thread? Linux has been being actively developed by people who want “shit to god damn work” forever.

        Yes and no. Yes as in “you can fix it” (if you’re a programmer), but no in terms of “everything is set up so binaries will still run in 20 years as-is”. Dependency hell, missing library versions, binaries being linked against old glibc versions you can’t provide… all of these are known issues, and devs are often being discouraged from compiling tools in a way that makes them work forever (since that makes the app bigger and potentially consume more memory). And better don’t tell someone who’s blind (and used Linux before) what’s quoted above, they’ll either laugh at you or get really angry. It’s also one of the reasons I’m angry (I’m able to see, but I hate this hypocrisy in the community). Linux on desktop utterly alienated disabled people, simply because stuff like screenreaders keep breaking.

        • qqq@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          Running 20 year old binaries is not the primary use case and it is very manageable if you actually want to do that. I’ve been amazed at some completely ancient programs that I’ve been able to run, but I don’t see any reason a 20 year old binary should “just work”, that kind of support is a bit silly. Instead maybe we should encourage abandonware to not be abandonware? If you’re not going to support your project, and that project is important to people, provide the source. I don’t blame the Linux developers for that kind of thing at all.

          devs are often being discouraged from compiling tools in a way that makes them work forever (since that makes the app bigger and potentially consume more memory)

          This is simply not true. If you want your program to be a core part of a distribution, yes, you must follow that distribution’s packaging and linking guidelines: I’m not sure what else a dev would expect. There is no requirement that your program be part of a distribution’s core. Dynamic linking isn’t some huge burden holding everyone back and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would pretend it is. If you want to static link go for it? There is literally nothing stopping you.

          Linux desktop isn’t actively working against disabled people, don’t be obtuse. There is so much work being done for literally no money by volunteers and they are unable to prioritize accessibility. That’s unfortunate but it’s not some sort of hypocritical alienation. That also has likely very little to do with the Linux kernel ABI stability like you claimed earlier.

          But this idea that “finally we have people that want Linux to work” is infuriating. Do you have any idea how much of an uphill battle it has been to just get WiFi working on Linux? That isn’t because the volunteer community is lazy and doesn’t want things to work: that’s because literally every company is hostile to the open source community to the point of sometimes deliberately changing things just to screw us over. The entitlement in that statement is truly infuriating.