You actually can connect a Steam Deck to another PC. Look for the DeckMTP plugin on Decky Loader.
MTP is the thing Android uses when you connect your phone to a PC. It should be possible to install on any PC. Don't know about Windows but there's probably a solution for that as well.
Don't know what happens when both devices have it. I'd suspect that they would both be able to access each other's drive.
Oh yeach i specificaly asked this question due to frustraions in using warpinator.
It constantly stopped. Probably because my network is horrible ( the usual case of a crap router provided by isp. And to add to the frustration its the T-Mobile odu idu unit so its also under double NAT alghtough that part shouldnt matter in sending files through local network ).
It has nothing to do with bash specifically - other shells like sh, csh, tcsh, zsh, etc. are the same. Whitespace in UNIX is just that way by design. And it's been a long while since I used a Windows CLI but they were that way too - plus added all that weirdness about ~1 at the ends of filenames, and Mac OSX also. So not even just UNIX, but it's how the CLIs tend to work, where whitespace acts as the "delimiter" between arguments sent to a program.
program_name arg1 arg2 arg3 arg4
So if you use whitespace like "cp file 1 file 2", the CLI sends arg1="file", arg2="1", arg3="file", arg4="2", rather than arg1="file 1" and arg2="file 2". These are just the foundational rules of how CLIs work - a computer can't read your mind, and this is how you precisely tell it what you want, within this highly rigid framework to avoid misunderstandings.
The alternative is to use a GUI, so like see file, drag file, and ofc that has its own set of tradeoffs good and bad.
Yeah, for this reason, lots of full-fledged programming languages actually make you specify the arguments as a list of strings directly, so for example:
It's a subset of the standard delimiter problem: if I want to use the delimiter inside of an entry, can I even do that and if so then how?
e.g. in comma-delimited lists you could "escape" the commas individually, or encapsulate each entry inside quotes, or provide each entry by name, etc. - all of which significantly complicates the retrieval process by adding greater complexity to decide on rules determining how it all works (like if by name, then what if the user [stupidly? on purpose?] provides multiple entries with the same name - do subsequent ones overwrite the earlier ones or their contents get appended to the end and if the latter, is any separation provided between them? and on and on it goes):
item1,item2,item3
"Denver, CO","New York, NY",Miami/, FL
"Lastname, Firstname",Lastname/, Firstname
item1="Denver, CO", item2="New York, NY"
Common English has issues with this too like is a list with "John, Marsha, Barbie and Ken" 4 entries or just 3 where the latter is a pairing? (leading to Oxford comma discussion:-P it is very important though bc while while individual people may have similar needs like food, pairings may have different constraints like if they drive together then they need less parking space)
So this delimiter issue is not even specific to CLIs, nor even computers in general - it is a universal problem with any communication system.
That only affects whitespaces within quotes though. Still, fair point, except I just tried a bunch of stuff in both bash and zsh and touching a file works, echoing a string works, then I stopped so I don't know about the asterisk but we have already veered far away from what OP said: "normal foor (sic) loop with whitespace in file names" - whereas what you had seems significantly more advanced than a "normal" foor (sic:-P) loop.
Notably, Mac OSX right out of the box uses zsh. I haven't touched "standard" personal distros for a number of years but a quick search suggests that Mint, Ubuntu, and NixOS all use bash by default - which halfway though not entirely surprises me? Anyway if OP wants to change their default shell to something more advanced, that would be fine for common every-day usage, though asking for bash itself to now be changed after decades of backwards compatibility seems a non-starter to me. There are reasons for why it works as it does, and those reasons have nothing to do with it being "old", but rather b/c it "works".
And the underlying reason for that is b/c we are still using keyboards. The addition of mice as HUDs enabled drag-and-drop, and perhaps some kind of glove or fingertip reader or eyesight-tracker may allow the same, like Minority Report (an old movie) or Iron Man style pinching an "object", grabbing it and letting it go, is basically just another style of "mouse". Afaik, there hasn't been even a hint of anything truly revolutionary for all this time. Although I can envision one such idea: combining keyboard+"mouse" in a more intelligent way, like if you start typing a command, then fix your eyes on the screen to a particular file and perhaps flick your eyes in a particular direction to indicate acceptance and it could fill it in for you, without having to move your hands away from the keyboard. With glasses and ubiquitous cameras everywhere now, we might see something like that in a few decades? Though it would put further pressure onto privacy concerns over having a camera watching every move you make.
Yeah, Apple moved to Zsh as default some years back, which is the main reason I'm familiar with its differences in terms of parameter expansion. They still ship Bash 3.2 with macOS, but they can't ship newer versions due to GPLv3 licensing, or something like that. So they had the motivation to switch.
In the Linux world, there's no great motivation to change the default, because Bash 5.x is already comparable to zsh in terms of features, and it's what everyone is already familiar with.
Perhaps I misunderstood OP's question. I figured they meant using variables. Otherwise I don't know how to make sense of it.
Admittedly, I too am not certain why "noone inprove bash such that you can write a normal foor loop with whitespace in file names?" :-P I just noticed that not only was "foor" loop misspelled, and "noone" is likewise improper (should be "no one" or "nobody"), but "inprove" is also a "performance improvement company that helps clients implement their internal continuous improvement programs more effectively, and achieve better, more consistent and sustained results", according to Google's (SEO) search feature:-P
Therefore, I have little trouble believing that they wanted all of bash to be changed - for free ofc - so that they could do something like:
touch "Iron Man"; mv Iron Man The Greatest Movie of All Time!?
And the computer would auto-magically figure out that since mv is a command involving files, and "Iron Man" is a file that exists, that it should be the first argument and the rest of the text is the second argument. i.e., why learn how bash works, when you can make a post to !Linux and put hundreds of programmers to work for you to change the entire world, at your beck and call, while also working in how ashamed they should be that they haven't done that effort preemptively?
Which ngl, might be a good idea. Or, you know, OP could learn to use tab-complete that already does that. I should have mentioned that I suppose... but it seems too late now b/c I doubt the mods will let this post remain for too much longer. Even if you were correct and they meant variables: they never actually said that, which makes this communication really difficult to both guess what OP might have meant and also solve their problem for them, on top of them being willing to learn on their own. But we can do better on our end too: perhaps we could create a community specialized in providing help to newcomers who want to learn linux - like what resources can they read/watch/play with, to help them get started? To be clear, *I'm* not offering to start that!!
a quick search suggests that Mint, Ubuntu, and NixOS all use bash by default
With Debian-based distros, it's actually a bit weirder. They use dash as the global default shell (i.e. for executing sh scripts). dash has basically no code for interactive use, so it's supposedly faster and more secure. It is POSIX-compliant, so the treatment of whitespace should be identical, but it doesn't support any of the added features of bash.
If you open up a terminal emulator, they've got that set up to use bash by default, so dash is supposed to be invisible to the user, but well, spoilers, it's not. If you switch to a TTY, for example, it launches there and makes the TTY look completely broken.
That will work in either zsh or bash, yes. It's a good habit to use quotes, but I am pointing out that quoting and expansion behavior is not the same across all shells.
The discussion went like nobody is properly using the SharePoint, but instead people send emails with poorly version numbered documents. After a couple of attempts to educate the users my argument was to drop the hammer: if you're forced to work online you're more likely to work in the shared folders. If that's true, we'll see. But in the meantime I can get rid of windows. Most of the organisation is on macOS anyway.
See my comment below, we're moving to gsuite. Basically, we have a problem with people not using the SharePoint but instead sending poorly version numbered documents per mail.
My argument was that if you're forced to work online you're more likely to do so in the shared folder. We'll see if that's true but at least we can get rid of office. Most of the organisation is on macOS anyway. And we use zulip for communication.
Debian sid user here, and long time keepassxc user
Debian maintainer didnt communicate this well, but i agree that i dont want my password manager having any access to networking or interacting with anything other than the clipboard.
I'm not a developer or a security expert. This is just my gut feeling talking
Exactly. And if you want those features, you install the full version. Packages can break in sid, that is the whole point of it.
I am also running sid and keepassxc and I see no problem with this change. In fact it seems like a very sane thing to do, and something I wished more packages did.
Sane move by maintainer, but he should not go around calling other people's code crap unless there is proof that the code was actually crap with gaping security hole
He could have handled it better. But he didn't call the code crap directly, just the bundle of everything.
Having a meta package and let users choose seems like the best way. But this is a Debian issue, and not a keepassxc issue. It is up to Debian to package it anyway they want.
First of all Linux isn't a company, but the name some dude named Linus gave his code he put for free on the internet.
Most modern Linux distros are still not run by companies, that's why they don't force the data collection, ads, ai etc down your throat.
That said: Linux is made from thousands of interlocking programs, scripts, services and libraries, made mostly by some guys or gurls in their free time. So with a lot of stuff you need to fit it to your needs, as granular customization is to troublesome to have working out of the box for every different usecase there could be. So with most stuff you should not be afraid to learn the basics of terminal commands (packet manager, editor, foldermanagment)
Some OS like Ubuntu and manjaro do a lot for you, but if you have weird double monitors, you may need to manually do some stuff.
If you want as much as possible easy install options I would go with manjaro - then you can install everything where users made an AUR (arch user repository) package. Check if they have all programs you want, if not look for alternatives.
If you want a more stable system but with a bit less possibilities, go for Ubuntu, debian, popOS or something like that.
Some things may never run, for example for my music daw(ableton) with low latency and not native support on Linux or the htc vive wireless (where there isn't a driver for the PCI card for Linux) I keep a win machine around. Day to day use is on debian on my side
No sorry man, it’s my british humor coming out. I needed to bait some linux users :) I’m one of those evil people who works in marketing. But thank you for the tips, I do appreciate it!
Ahah correct! But in all seriousness, i believe ads are drastically changing right now (ai is just fuel on the flame). Good advertising is great, fun and builds community, which is the end goal in my humble opinion.
If you force me to use/install a product without telling me why, just because “trust me bro I’m Microsoft”, you are just pathetically insecure about your product and deserve 0 users.
Unfortunately, I think you're a rare breed. I've met people in graphic design and marketing who will actually defend advertising practices in the face of the incontrovertible fact that: I don't like it.
We're past the point of "you just don't know what you want" and well into "we're going to hold you down and shove it down your gd throat" territory.
I had a look at it, but after paying 200€ for ableton, paying for another program which doesn't natively integrate with my push and doesn't have as good standard librarys, instruments, effects and sounds was to hurtfull
Linux is made from thousands of interlocking programs, scripts, services and libraries, made mostly by some guys or gurls in their free time.
That's not entirely true: Most work is paid for in some way, eg. by foundations, employees of companies which need a feature or freelancers commissioned to do some work.
OK, point given
What I meant was, that most distros and programs depend on some level on code written by individuals or at least without profit incentive --> therefore for those bits of code the developer isn't liable in the same way. Sure, the core of libre office is written by programmers payed by the document foundation, but it nevertheless uses libs which are not, and therefore have not the same level of customer support or liability as Microsoft word would have, where they build most stuff in house and get played handsomely
I started off with Manjaro, and updates kept breaking shit. Only reason it was usable for me, was that I kept timeshift going so I could recover from an unbootable state if updates borked something.
Especially if OPs system is unusual, I wouldn't trust Manjaro. I've yet to need timeshift on my Endeavour install, while setting it up to do the same things was no more difficult.
Dude is just starting out, no matter what arch derivative you're suggesting, it's a bad idea. Flatpak is perfectly fine for installing fresher versions of those packages AFAIK.
Dude writes code, that makes me a lot more comfortable recommending an arch install of some kind. Endeavour especially, as it sets you up at a very good starting point without doing messy shit like Manjaro.
Dude writes code, that makes me a lot more comfortable recommending an arch install of some kind.
You drive trucks for a living, so you should commute in a rocket car that breaks down randomly. Or are you going to be a chicken and choose something slower, but far more dependable?
Agreed on flatpak, it's fine.
It's pretty counterproductive to suggest something that requires significantly more maintenance if the features are not required. So if flatpak is fine, there's no need for arch, unless the OP is FOMOing for plasma 6 or something.
If you think a hyperbolised analogy is an insult, take care of your delicate constitution and don't risk maladies by entering discussions on the internet.
No, I'm simply standing behind my initial statement, and pointing out why your counter argument is bad.
It's not though.
Wat is arch? I only used it and its derivatives on multiple devices for multiple years in my 15+ years of Linux
Good for you.
If you think a hyperbolised analogy is an insult, take care of your delicate constitution and don't risk maladies by entering discussions on the internet.
I mean, if my assumption that you were being mean-spirited before was strenuous, this and linking that video makes it a sealed deal.
You can't get under my skin, but that doesn't mean you're not being shitty by trying.
My first experiences were Ubuntu and and pop OS and i t really drove me away from Linux, because especially with Ubuntu lots of the promised customizability and deep control wasn't there (if you are a first time user who don't know about the 4-5 places config files can be located, often differing between distros so google doesnt always hekp, you have no idea what sysctl is, how compiling works, how to manage dependencies), instead with gnome you get an Apple/mobile like minimalistic look, where nothing of the ui just says what it does and most things can't be changed in the gui which I really hated.
When I got manjaro for the first time, I was blown away about how much you could do with Linux even when not a programmer, because smart people on the AUR have paved the way. Also you had things like btrfs which are just plain better then win NTFS or linux ext.
Im not a programmer and don't work in IT, but man arch was making me interested in Linux.
But you are right, it broke way to often, that's why I settled for debian after all, as it has the right amount of stability and options imho
Also when coming from win OR having some technical skill OR wanting a highly customizable, good looking feature rich desktop envirment:
GO FOR KDE PLASMA!!! THE NEW VERSION IS SO GREAT I FUCKING LOVE IT
Ubuntu lots of the promised customizability and deep control wasn't there (if you are a first time user who don't know about the 4-5 places config files can be located,
How's arch any different?
often differing between distros so google doesnt always hekp
It's either following FHS or not. I've never seen them dropped in random places and also differing between distros.
Not knowing about FHS is not distro specific.
you have no idea what sysctl is, how compiling works, how to manage dependencies)
And why would a brand new beginner touch any of those? If you need to enable something specific, the guide will most likely include systemd instructions. If you need something that's not in the repo, use flatpak for example. If you're not pointlessly compiling, you don't need to manage dependencies, your PMs are doing it for you.
When I got manjaro for the first time, I was blown away about how much you could do with Linux even when not a programmer, because smart people on the AUR have paved the way.
You can do the same things, and AUR doesn't change that, it only gives you an additional source of packages that can't be blindly trusted.
Also you had things like btrfs which are just plain better then win NTFS or linux ext.
They can be set up on other distros, if you don't like timeshift or other solutions. Btrfs is also not really necessary on a stable distro. A security patch is far less likely to break your system when compared to random bleeding edge releases.
But you are right, it broke way to often, that's why I settled for debian after all, as it has the right amount of stability and options imho
Check out MX, it's Debian with some desktop improvements, and a far more sensible default DE for the distro. I'm using it and it's pretty great, nix makes it a lot better, but flatpak does the job as well.
Also, it's really funny that a Debian user goes all fangirl over plasma 6
Plasma 6 - soon on a desktop near you (in 1-3+ years when it stops being a broken mess early enough to be tested and included in the new release)
I think what makes arch different for first time users is mainly the user repository. If I want to have glassy themed desktop for example on Ubuntu I need to understand kvantum, which folder need which permissions, download themes from a website, kvantum from the terminal and install them, while on arch I type
yay glassy-themeXY
Sure arch comes with more possibilities in terms if what combinations of software are possible and rolling release etc. Pp. But that's not that tangeble or import for the beginners usage.
When installing teamspeak for Ubuntu I need to understand how to make my own desktop entries, mark files as executable, how to install .deb packages etc, while on arch I type yay teamspeak, done.
Sure aur is not the most secure source, but better (and easier) then blindly copy pasting commands from some forum or manually downloading dubious python scripts from github.
In a nutshell: I can rely on other (smarter) users better on arch than Ubuntu.
For the customization at the time Ubuntu only had gnome, which is easy but not very powerful in its GUI options from my experience. Manjaro came with KDE plasma which is way more in depth with its GUI.
I don't know what you are talking about with everything in the same place regardless of distro, I seldom find any config file i dont already know without googleing it for my system. Package names are different, the according folders are different, depending on you DE all paths regarding this will be different.
In win you have all your settings in the settings app (and the values stored in registry)
EVERY file of the program you would need to accsess is in the program folder (or roaming).
On Linux, the steam installation via snap has another file structure than via apt, and another for flatpack and another for appimage and another for the aur version which is different from the selfcompiled version. Depending on your Linux version the gamebug could be produced by a file in any of those folders (mostly not one place but some in /etc some in /home/steam some in home/.local some in /home/.share etc. Pp.) Also steam depends on like 100 libraries which are stored in different places. Not to even start with symlinks, config files you should not edit because they get generated from a template in another dir which you instead should be editing and stuff like this.
For people who are working in the field or using the system since decades this becomes natural at some point. But for people who can't (yet) deal with this kind of stuff it makes a HUGE difference if they can type "yay teamspeak" or not.
Sure, by now it seems trivial for me to know about sudo, chmod, .deb files, apt, .desktop files how to add a repository, manage gpg keyrings and so on but in the beginning, coming from windows this was confusing and overcomplicated as heck (remember under win installing a programming is literally double klicking an installer and that's it)
When you don't know about this stuff and don't have the time to watch tutorials or read man pages when wanting to do anything, the difference between this and "yay teamspeak" was like day and night, a matter of usable vs. Unusable.
People good with this stuff underestimate how valuable it is for noobs to be able to rely on smarter people. If I had installed ts when starting with Linux it would have been way more prone to failure and insecurity than a package by an experienced arch user.
The "why would a beginner need those" question always strikes me as odd, because it always sounds love me people wanna deny use cases. I tried changing my local one time, because I accidentally installed the us English default and in the end it was easier to reinstall, because changing the local here doesn't automatically changes the local there, and for this the locale gets baked in when installing and then your off chasing details and suddenly needing systemctl commands or editing system.d config files or stuff like that. (Again, for something that is literally one klick in a drop down menu for win). I have never seen someone who uses Linux without ever needing the terminal, while doing more than webbrowsing and emails (while for win it is the default to never need the cmd) So if you didn't study IT for 6 semesters you come to the point where GUI is not working anymore and you don't know what to do REALLY fast. In this case you are of to either fail if you don't want to spend hours tinkering and learning about internals of Linux or you have the aur, where its not that unlikely that someone has already written a package to accomplish the task.
"You can do the same things with the aur as without" is the dumbest shit I've ever heard (sry)
Its like saying you can do the same thing with a guitar as with a CD. Sure, if you are skilled enough you can produce similar results, but for 90% of humanity its either you have the CD and can hear Elvis Presley or you can tinker with the guitar for hours and in the end get something that doesn't even vaguely resembles Elvis Presley. --> you can't hear Elvis Presley.
For btrfs: OK, give me the Debian bookworm installer where you can select ANY enrcrypted format that is not luks-->lvm-->ext. I looked lastime I installed there wasnt an option for encrypted btrfs on Debian, but there was on arch
Maybe I could customize filesystems and install drivers/libs etc afterwards, but from what I've read its not that easy to get it working and it for sure didn't work out of the box.
But please correct me if I am wrong.
For flatpack: I avoid it, as people who are far more deep into the topic than me said its basically snap with extra steps, bloated, insecure, against the Linux philosophy of interlocking FOSS software blah blah. Didn't understand most of it but followed the advice.
If I want to have glassy themed desktop for example on Ubuntu I need to understand kvantum, which folder need which permissions, download themes from a website, kvantum from the terminal and install them, while on arch I type yay glassy-themeXY
But yeah, the large repo + AUR do make some things easier. Although the additional package managers are quite close, while allowing for a more dependable base system.
When installing teamspeak for Ubuntu I need to understand how to make my own desktop entries, mark files as executable, how to install .deb packages etc, while on arch I type yay teamspeak, done.
flatpak search teamspeak -> flatpak install com.teamspeak.TeamSpeak -> done (I'll get to flatpak later)
Sure aur is not the most secure source, but better (and easier) then blindly copy pasting commands from some forum or manually downloading dubious python scripts from github.
Sure, and that's why you can use something like flatpak in any scenario. I prefer nix, but that's still not user friendly.
For the customization at the time Ubuntu only had gnome,
They have flavours for each DE, same as Fedora has spins. It's an easy way to ensure default apps go with the correct DE.
I don’t know what you are talking about with everything in the same place regardless of distro
Most packages follow FHS and XDG, but there are still plenty of them that just drop it in ~ and call it a day.
The FHS ones (/etc, /usr/share, /usr/local/etc) are where you're supposed to find default configs. But, /usr should be read-only and only ever copied from, while /etc is for system wide configs.
The XDG configs are tied to your user, and only located at your ~. Usually in ~/.config but there are some cases where you might want to use ~/.local/
On Linux, the steam installation via snap has another file structure than via apt, and another for flatpack and another for appimage and another for the aur version which is different from the selfcompiled version.
Yes, but that's got nothing to do with the distro.
Apt and pacman follow the FHS, AUR just provides instructions to pacman.
Appimages contain everything they need to run in a single file that you execute.
Flatpak, snap, nix, guix, distrobox, etc. don't save in the exact same directories because it's much safer that way, but they still roughly follow FHS. For example nix symlinks everything into ~/.nix-profile and provides you with the same structure as apt (/etc, etc.)
When you don’t know about this stuff and don’t have the time to watch tutorials or read man pages when wanting to do anything, the difference between this and “yay teamspeak” was like day and night, a matter of usable vs. Unusable.
GUI stores like discovery allow you to install and update packages from different stores at the same time. You can search for teamspeak and chose to install the deb or flatpak. Can't get more user friendly than that.
In win you have all your settings in the settings app (and the values stored in registry) EVERY file of the program you would need to accsess is in the program folder (or roaming).
No, you have the available windows settings in the settings apps. KDE approaches it the same way, and is far superior IMO. The difference is that if you want to change something that's not covered by the settings apps, windows forces you to blindly copy-paste regedit commands, while linux has a text file.
For packages there is no FHS, they might or might not include default configs if they support text configs in the first place (a BIG part of the UNIX philosophy), or they might generate them when needed. It might be in one of the program files, in multiple locations in my documents and app data, or you might need to once again blindly copy-paste regedit commands. Hell, a windows program might use different 5 location for different configs.
The “why would a beginner need those” question always strikes me as odd, because it always sounds love me people wanna deny use cases. I tried changing my local one time, ...
It's more because Linux has come a long way. For example I can just use MX Date & Time and use a gui to adjust my local and hardware time without ever touching the terminal.
“You can do the same things with the aur as without” is the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard (sry) Its like saying you can do the same thing with a guitar as with a CD.
Nah, that's coming right up:
For flatpack: I avoid it, as people who are far more deep into the topic than me said its basically snap with extra steps, bloated, insecure, against the Linux philosophy of interlocking FOSS software blah blah. Didn’t understand most of it but followed the advice.
Argument from authority is a logical fallacy, and I don't think basing your entire argument on willful ignorance requires further comment
People have issues with snap due to following reasons, and none of them apply to flatpak:
snap is forced on ubuntu users and apt randomly installs snaps instead of deb
snap slows down boot times because it mounts virtual FS'
snap store and packages are closed source, and while snap is open source, the snap store is hardcoded
Additional package managers are bloated in the same way cars are bloated for having seatbelts and airbags. The only way to reliably prevent dependency mismatches is to have a separate set of dependencies.
For example: you want to install the newest obs, but it requires a higher version glibc than your KDE. Installing the newer glibc in the exact same location as your system could possibly break your system. Pacman simply errors out, on the other hand flatpak provides the correct version to each of the packages it installs. And that's possible because:
Everything is isolated, and generally not only more secure, if the package is published by the developer, but could be even further improved:
each package gets its own private sandbox with a filesystem, libraries, dependencies, runtimes, etc.
there are built in systems to further isolate packages from each other and your system
you can use tools like flatseal to control permissions on top of whatever the base system uses (AppArmor/SELinux).
no sudo privileges required
Pacman can only use AppArmor/SELinux, and AUR is the riskier version of community flatpaks.
The thing is, you can't get better security and reliability without breaking FHS a bit. You also need to consider that they still try to follow it within the additional restrictions imposed on them. You get the same structure, but in respectively consistent places. It's a pretty good trade-off in my regard.
For btrfs: OK, give me the Debian bookworm installer where you can select ANY enrcrypted format that is not luks–>lvm–>ext.
The default one, and therefore essentially everything downstream: guided partition -> change from ext4 to btrfs and set to mount to / -> run the encryption wizard. Do read the maintenance section though, there are reasons why stable distros don't default to it. Besides that, rsync does the job more than well enough. You can use the timeshift gui to have it periodically take snapshots, or easily automate it in different ways.
Honestly, monthly snapshots are going to be just fine. That's the whole benefit of this kind of a setup. Your base system almost never changes, while everything you need to be up to date is completely separate. Half of my packages are nix unstable and just as bleeding edge as on arch, but my system is not at real risk of failing to boot due to an update because it's still Debian, and quite close to vanilla at that. You don't need btrfs and snapshots on every update because both flatpak and nix support rollbacks, and that's the only scenario where updates could be risky.
There are downsides, and possible complications during setup though, but I'd say the trade is more than worth it, especially if you depend on your device and can't have it break down because you ran a system update or installed a package without updating the whole system. Working abroad with bad internet really drew it home for me, and caused me to finally drop arch.
Pretty much. Plasma depends on regular updates, and is not nearly as good on stable distros that freeze it for years at a time. The version in Debian is almost 2 years old by now, and a new one isn't coming out for at least a year.
That's some nice info. From what I've heard manjaro is just arch with things done for you most users would do anyway (Desktop environment setup, package management set up, etc.)
But if arch is more stable even if some casual hobby ITler like me installs it I should maybe give it another try at times.
Didn't know there was much difference between arch distros, but now that you mention it: steamOS is working flawlessly while being arch could be an argument for your point. It thought this was more because its perfectly configured for the hardware and deck and I seldom need the OS itself outside of steam because I only use it for gaming.
Well the deck only gets updates once Valve decides they're good to go, and it's immutable so there can't be edge cases where system packages don't play nice with something user-installed.
Something similar is true for arch in general, package updates go out once they are good to go, and more importantly, when something really breaks, the fix comes in fast.
But manjaro tries to fix something which isn't broken by delaying arch updates by two weeks, meaning you sometimes gets stuck with broken things, waiting for the fix, or get updates that install versions of things that don't work together.
I have no idea. I think the claim is that as "arch is unstable", the delay allows them to make sure none of that "wild instability" makes it into Manjaro. But as far as I can tell, no such checking occurs and the delay is just a delay. I got into the habit of putting off updating because more often than not it meant an evening of timeshifting and troubleshooting.
But arch isn't really that unstable. On Endeavour (endeavours main repos are just the arch repos, they don't maintain their own) I update whenever my system notifies me there's new stuff, and the possibility that my system won't boot afterwards doesn't really cross my mind anymore. I still run timeshift, but I haven't needed it yet.
In fact, if you really want stability... Unless you need some upcoming security update, bug fix or feature, you can just keep using your system, only installing things when you need them. There's no real reason to impulsively install updates the second they are available. My system doesn't even check for updates more than once a week.
Then, if my system worked yesterday, it will do say today. And unless I decide to change something today, it will do so tomorrow too.
In that sense even arch's stability is "customizable" because you can voluntarily reduce how often you risk breaking something, while at the same time running a system with still more recent packages than most other distros.
Nah, but it sounded like its integrated in his notebook somehow AND having double touchscreens, which could have proprietary drivers or some dumb caviot. Normally having multiple monitors is not a problem (if you don't mind windows spawning with their top bar out of frame and stuff in wayland kde)
When I was younger, palmpilots and blackberrys were the coolest things to me. Something that was basically a computer you could carry in your pocket? I wanted one so bad! And now basically everyone has something even better. Funny how things change.
I only recently found out Blackberry still make phones and they still have the physical keyboard! One of my coworkers has one and I did a double take when I first seen it.
I would argue that the modern smartphone is different, but by no means better. Between the locked down operating systems and the lack of a physical keyboard they are great for consuming media through approved channels, but basically useless if you want to get any work done with them.
Why are everyone suddenly aware that Neochat is unmaintained. I mean, the last commit was 3 years ago and the last release alsmost 4 years ago. Just because the git repository got archived on a date does not mean that it was maintained up to that point.
Most people aren't going around checking the commit history on every piece of software they use. The git repository being archived made the Linux news rounds, so now a bunch of people are newly aware. It's not complicated.
I don't get people being worried about an offline application designed to run one shot as the current user not receiving updates. I do get maintainers dropping the package from package repos now that it is officially archived though...
Yeah, but if it hasn't reached that point then is it really dead?
Edit: Instead of downvoting me, consider this. What if the only update this program receives in years is one to make sure its still compatible with the libraries and APIs you refer to? Would that make it alive, or dead?
It seems like you guys are advocating for updating just for the sake of updating, also bandwagoning a bit.
Neofetch is literally a bash script. There aren't any libraries or APIs it depends on, and there is basically no chance of it not working in the future. Some people just like to try and sound smart.
The actual problem with Neofetch is that it's not being updated with new ASCII art for new distros, and not adding new options to show things like a line for display server or other things some people might be interested in. It's just getting out of date in regular boring ways.
Uh huh. You think that some cloud computing processor just randomly can't run a bash script? What, does the uname command not work on their processors or something? That would cause problems a lot worse than just Neofetch not working. I obviously don't have one laying around to check, but I find that highly unlikely.
I was kinda referencing warp, a supposedly new terminal that was also written in Rust, had AI stuff, started on Mac, and finally got a Linux version, which lasted 30 seconds on my computer once I saw there is no option to use it unless you make an account. Yes. For a LOCAL terminal. Nuts.
It's open source, and they already said they were Mac only because they used Metal for rendering. It's not suspicious for devs to use what they're most familiar with.
Yeah, even Asahi has better OpenGL support than real macOS. They make damn sure you have to use Metal to get the most out of it, just like eventually you get caught up in DirectX on Windows whether you want it or not. You can use Vulkan and OpenGL, but the OS really wants to work with Metal/DirectX buffers in the end.
I appreciate that the devs care enough to make it really good from the start, because that sets the benchmark. Now the Linux version has to have a similar enough polish to it.
In comparison, Atom and VSCode both worked fine on Linux just about day one thanks to Electron, but it was also widely disliked for the poor performance. It's a part of what Zed competes on, performance compared to VSCode.
they already said they were Mac only because they used Metal for rendering
And you say:
Metal is basically the only graphics API on Mac
So they're on Mac bc they need Metal, but they picked Metal bc they're on a Mac? It's circular and friggin weird man
Not to mention there are cross-platform wrappers that will pick from all three depending on system - some that are very prolific among Rust devs (Zed is coded in Rust) like wgpu, for instance. They could've used wgpu and supported all 3 from the get-go and it would be easier than doing Metal anyway!
And so picking just Mac and/or Metal first is suspicious.
I don't see where your problem comes from. It's really simple: they wanted to target Mac, likely because that's their preferred platform. So obviously they use the best fitting APIs for that purpose. Why would they develop a Linux or Windows application, if what they want is Mac? Nothing suspicious about that.
Is there any particular problem with MoltenVK? As I see it, it's by far the best solution for cross platform software on macOS in need of graphical hardware acceleration.
There’s nothing wrong with the software itself. It works great for what it does. On the other hand, it’s a compatibility layer, which always increases friction between things a little. I think the best use for this is running legacy software.
There aren’t many alternatives. Maybe in the future, we’ll see graphics API abstraction libraries like wgpu get used more. This gives developers a single API which can use DirectX on Windows, Vulkan on Linux, or Metal on macOS. This could allow support for entirely new graphics APIs without developers using it having to do anything.
Of course, that’s my opinion. People can build their software how they like.
While I generally agree with your skeptical attitude toward this, I think the fact that they were targeting Apple's Metal graphics API to built the most performant possible IDE makes sense. You can't just snap your fingers and have a Linux graphical stack start working with your software.
I think the reason they targeted macOS first is probably because many of the dev team uses Macs.
As a Linux user, I'll happily wait for software like this to get ported to native Linux APIs so we get performant text editors instead of more Electron crap.
As a die-hard Linux user, I understand that most of their devs probably used Macs. Sadly, they are likely not an outlier which means many ( most ) of their target customers are Mac users too.
Overall, I applaud their focus and platform native approach. Let’s hope we get a decent Linux editor out of it at some point.
Storm in a teacup, as tends to be the norm on the internet.
Not only this is nothing new and nothing unexpected to happen in Sid of all places, but it's also something that helps bring keepassxc more in line with packaging guidelines on Debian. They already have lots of packages, both of the mutually-exclusive kind and of the complementary kind, with "foo-full", "foo-minimal", "foo-data" etc naming. p7zip and nginx of all things are quite interesting examples.
Plus, the author of the post sensationalizes the title to brigade the issue.
All that said:
If the maintainer wishes to do this, "only" having two packages is a half-assed measure and that causes more issues in the long term. I'd expect three packages: keepassxc-minimal, keepassxc-full and the retained name keepassxc as a virtual package name.
Furthermore, a direct upgrade path should go from (previous) keepassxc to (proposed) keepassxc-full.
I don't know enough of KeePassXC to know if something like keepassxc-data would be needed. Are there potential cases where one would want to switch between "-full" and "-minimal" or viceversa without the system seeing a software uninstallation in the meantime?
The "crap" rationale is definitively something we all can do without, but given how people tend to brigade developers who try to do things, I can completely understand and support raising shields and looking defensive because some damage is already going to be done.
Most responses are right in that the right place to discuss this is in the opened Debian bug report. The entire point is to see Debian (not KeepassXC) handle this before things get to Next Stable.
Dont install it, yet. Make a bootable usb stick with balena etcher and put a linux distro on it (I highly recommend mint, pop_os or ubuntu (standard version) as ISO on it.
Ubuntu is very controversial in the more advanced sphere but I learned on it and its great for beginners.
If you want to go a little bit over the top download ventoy and put it on the usb instead. You can then put as many ISOs on there as you can fit and just select one of them at boot.
The most important part for beginners is the desktop environment anyway so gnome should be fine. If you have tried it for more than an hour and still feel like this could be fun, click install and give it a go.
You could also dual boot but windows might fuck you over since they‘re not great neighbors as an OS.
Feel free to ask if you want to know more. Good luck.
Ubuntu is very controversial in the more advanced sphere
I would argue only turbonerds really complain about it. But in my experience, for professionals who just need to get things done it works perfectly fine 99% of the time. Same for Windows or OSX to be honest.
Of course there's going to be those one or two guys from the vocal minority with some esoteric hardware that didn't work chiming in shortly I'm sure.
I think its an outdated recommendation. They keep making weird choices and one of only two friends that was willing to try Linux went and tried Ubuntu without my input and decided to go back to windows for a bunch of mostly mundane reasons that could have either been configured away or been preempted by using a different distro. The other guy will be back but on bazzite after trying my steam deck he only left for shitty rootkit anticheat games that he's now sick of. He started on one of the arch easy install methods and was already a power user on both windows and Mac.
In fact I used ubuntu until version 23.10 iirc so no, its not an outdated recommendation. Actually I still use it on my servers because it doesnt need a desktop there and I‘m not changing OSs unless I have to. 22.04 is still perfectly fine on there.
The issue with power users (I‘m an admin myself) is that we‘re used to being in control and some new OS feels weird as we might get stuck for a bit. Not everyone likes to deal with that.
In fact, I dont use ubuntu on my desktop anymore because of their snap craze. I also think talking down to people shows lack of character btw. Have a good one anyway.
But you can tell me how you think I was talking down to people? I'd like to know so I can correct my behavior if necessary.
Was it the word turbonerd? Sure not everyone may agree with that, it was said jokingly and I really just meant non-professional users who are passionate about Linux, wasn't trying to make fun of anyone.
I highly appreciate you asking for feedback and acknowledge a possible opportunity for growth. Very rare, doubly so on the internet imo.
The intention you use something with - sadly - does not communicate over written text well. If you use common derogatory language in a „funny“ way doesnt change that it is derogatory. Think calling a black person the n word or a woman the b word but „meaning it funny“.
The word turbo nerd is exceptionally derogatory and akin to making fun of disabled people.
screaming at themselves or cursing can be a sign of tourette, the IT world has a very high rate of autistic people and hearing them scream can be a sign of a meltdown. Thats not something to make fun about.
In any case it never is your business to make fun of someone except the person gives consent (ie is a friend who is cool with being treated that way or does the same with you). Taking away people‘s agency that way is indeed what can lead to horrible outcomes. Just dont do it. You can be funny in a different way.
The word turbo nerd is exceptionally derogatory and akin to making fun of disabled people.
This is really not true in any way, and he never mentioned screaming. It is good that he's being conscious here, and I don't want to assume anything about your personal experiences, but I felt like I should offer my perspective because I feel that yours is not representative of the common view.
Listen mate, please read before you assume. I cited a source because thats what you do when you claim stuff so I did.
Using degrading language isnt okay and neither is trying to dismiss someone explaining it because its „not representative of the common view“. I never said it was.
I was explaining how I made the conclusion. No reason for you to jump to their defence. I was explaining. Have a good one.
Speaking of assuming, you assumed he was using the Urban Dictionary definition. What I was trying to say is that he likely didn't mean it in that manner. It's good to be conscious that the UD definition exists, but it seemed like you were saying he was intentionally using that definition.
Exactly. Just that I didnt assume that he meant anything. I‘m not going off of any ideas of others‘ minds as I cant know what goes on in there. I‘m talking about a common interpretation which people will follow if no other context is provided.
Why? Because it asks the user if they would like to send feedback to Canonical during setup? Because that's the only privacy issue I can remember re: Canonical, after their weird Amazon lens was quickly killed off.
Why is asking for feedback a bad thing? IMO it's better than just being on by default, and still gives the developers an opportunity to at least get SOME useful feedback instead of all the people that screech about how telemetry should be banned entirely. I would bet money none of those people are professional developers.
Why is asking for feedback a bad thing? IMO it’s better than just being on by default, and still gives the developers an opportunity to at least get SOME useful feedback instead of all the people that screech about how telemetry should be banned entirely. I would bet money none of those people are professional developers.
Indeed. Programmers really love feedback to improve their applications. I bet that everyone who installs apps for iOS or Android from the Google Play Store will have lots of apps that have crash-a-lytics, or whatever it is called, installed.
I don't think it's bad to ask; even Debian asks you for feedback. Ubuntu, Debian, and a bunch of other distros are doing the right thing by making this feedback opt-in, but for some people even that is already too much.
I have no idea what supposed privacy issues Ubuntu has these days. Snap is certainly A Controversial Thing, but it's been years since they made a deal with Amazon.
I admit, everything I know about Ubuntu is heresay as I don't use it myself. But I was under the impression that there was a lot of telemetry that they send back, and ads/bloatware they ship with to subsidize their development.
The only part I think I was wrong about was the level of consent requested from the user. I was under the impression that they were kinda like Firefox, opting the user into telemetry sharing by default, making the refusal of data sharing more obtuse or hidden than it should be. But my impression that ubuntu still serves ads and still feels like someone else letting you use their system sounds accurate.
It sounds like you use Ubuntu, so you could probably let me know where I'm wrong.
There is a lot of Ubuntu hate and it is easy to go with that and repeat.
The Amazon button on the Ubuntu desktop (I believe it was not in the Ubuntu flavors) was removed after criticism.
Ads in the terminal. I've only seen those when using ssh to a server. Ads like the k8 server options of Ubuntu. No flashy jumpy colorful big ads but just small text.
Telling people that there is no difference between installing Ubuntu and Windows is kind of cruel imho. A fresh Ubuntu installation allows the new Linux user to learn Linux and after some time they can decide to go for Arch Linux, Debian (The install is not that easy as with Ubuntu for a beginner Linux user), MX Linux or whatever they prefer.
Oh yeah, totally agree it's not the same as windows. I said if their concern about windows was privacy, Ubuntu won't feel different. It'll feel like they're letting you use their PC. I still get that sense from all descriptions I hear. I forgot about the ads in the terminal, that's wild.
Every server I've encountered in my professional life runs either some kind of enterprise™ Linux like Red Hat (licensed, expensive ones), Ubuntu, or Debian, or some extremely customised Linux that's unusable for any purpose other than whatever it was built for. Dev machines run Ubuntu, or maybe Fedora or some enterprise™ Linux.
I've heard from a lot of startups using nixOS and your Arch flavour of the week, but I'm pretty sure that's only used because all four people in the company are Linux turbo nerds who have managed to agree on one specific obscure Linux distro.
Business people do complain about Ubuntu, though. They don't like automatic updates (because their weird proprietary software only works with the specific versions they picked and they can't be bothered to actuslly fix their code) so snaps are a threat. Ubuntu Pro expanding threatens their "use software someone else pays maintenance tax for without any bill" business plan. See also: "I like Debian but I dislike the way they patch things and how hard it is to install proprietary blobs onto it".
They want their free software to be maintained for free not because they care about software freedom, but because they're cheap, and Canonical and IBM starting to charge businesses for the software development they do threatens that business model.
I'm using Nix and it's basically the same as every other Linux distro except settings and packages are managed slightly differently. It's the DE that really makes a difference for people I think.
Conceptually, Nix is just the next evolution of tools like Ansible, and tangentially related to projects like Silverblue, but in practice, it's only used by enthusiasts. And, of course, you can use Nix outside of NixOS.
Unless there's a tool I don't know about, there's no equivalent for Discover or Gnome Software for NixOS. Because that's the class of boring people that make up the silent majority: the people who don't know how to, or don't want to edit configuration files. This was how Valve made Linux on a console a success, and it's why Ubuntu is still popular despite their experiments causing them to be decried by the community over and over again.
I love it but I definitely wouldn't call it rock solid. I have occasional small bugs here and there and especially with the Plasma 6 switch I've had the whole desktop going down (and taking all programs with it). That has been fixed though.
I was not satisfied with Plasma because I would have different window styles etc.
With Plasma 6 I removed all themes and all the shit and customized it with builtin features only. It looks so nice and clean and just works like a charm.
Encountering sleep/black screen bug is not freedom. The average linux user is shifting, its not longer being used only by teens/tech savvy. People want to get things done.
You will never get the same font rendering on Linux as on Windows as Windows font rendering (ClearType) is very strange, complicated and covered by patents.
Font rendering is also kind of a subjective thing. To anyone who is used macOS, windows font rendering looks wrong as well. Apple's font rendering renders fonts much closer to how they would look printed out. Windows tries to increase readability by reducing blurriness and aligning everything perfectly with pixels, but it does this at the expense of accuracy.
Linux's font rendering tends to be a bit behind, but is likely to be more similar to macOS than to Windows rendering as time goes forward. The fonts themselves are often made available by Microsoft for using on different systems, it's just the rendering that is different.
For me, on my screens just by installing Segoe UI and tweaking the hinting / antialiasing under GNOME settings makes it really close to what Windows delivers. The default Ubuntu font, Cantarell and Sans don't seem to be very good fonts for a great rendering experience.
Definitely very subjective. People keep saying macOS has amazing font rendering but for me it just looks like a blurry mess, especially on non-retina displays. My fonts are set to be as sharp as possible on Linux because when coding and in the terminal I want very sharp fonts so they're easier to read for me.
Seconding the dependence on the particular font as well. Cantarell, Ubuntu and OpenSans are all fairly blurry regardless, unless seen on HiDPI screens in which case they do look more like macOS. DejaVu Sans can be very sharp in contrast at very low resolutions because it's been made in the 800x600 and 1024x768 days and optimized to look sharp when small.
I gotta highly disagree with the blurry mess comment. To my eye Linux is looking about 90% as good as Mac these days. Mac fonts look the best but that os is worse in a lot of other ways. Windows always has looked worst font wise, though I will say it looks better these days than it used to.
Thanks a lot for the info! I just went and installed segoe Ui font, and it looked even worse than Ubuntu Regular and I tried all the hinting options and made sure to restart after each change!!!
I'm partial to macOS and I agree, I think Windows font rendering looks like garbage. On GNOME, I've found things to be okay. Sucks that patents are involved in this mess
Linux
Top
This magazine is not receiving updates (last activity 51 day(s) ago).