What is this linux bullshit anyway?

compile this, install that, download the other crap, set that variable, reinstall that package...

I'm so sick and tired of all this crap.

I just want a distro where every piece of software gets its own fucking directory and does its own shit in there, with a clear, clean and simple way of exposing provides, dependencies and configurations so there's no fucking time waste on figuring out all sorts of shit on your own.

  • 4
    If its about setting up project environment, Docker?

    If its about setting up tools you use, mhmm maybe switch to Windows, cause that's not how Linux was imagined to work..
  • 3
  • 5
    The first part of your rant and the latter contradict each other.
  • 5
    Sounds like you would love/hate Docker
  • 4
    I don't know there's an OS distro of anything where you have "the one folder" for each application. Every OS, application has a more or less conventional strategy for executable, path, global and user config. I definitely prefer *nux because no registry, but that's just me.
  • 0
    @SortOfTested me neither. i'd probably be using it. i'm so sick of all this crap.
  • 3
    Are you sure, you are into IT?
  • 5
    @Oktokolo Not everyone in IT likes fighting avalanches of error messages because some bullshit software doesn't like a certain config file or doesn't detect an installed library. It's just frustrating, but on the other hand Windows isn't immune either.
  • 5
    The way I see it :
    Linux :
    Find a recipe
    Go buy groceries
    Prepare your food. If you fuck up something: start from scratch.
    Result can be delicious or awfull depending on errors you made

    Windows :
    Order Uber eat
    If not satisfied: Blame Uber or restaurant and get your money back
  • 2
    Of course not. But Linux distros normally do not bahave like the OP described.
  • 2
    Yea in the end you get what you pay for.

    Not to say you can’t get shit when you overpay for commercial software.
  • 1
    @NoToJavaScript all good except with OSS you can get shitty results even if you don’t make any mistakes but the groceries are shit.
  • 0
    You just described most Linux distributions ever made.

    Go on distrowatch and pick one from the top 100 at random and it will most likely do this.

    This bothers me so much. People complain about the easiest shit sometimes.

    I can do that too: “I hate windows, it’s so hard, it’s just bad! Why can’t they make it easy!? It’s got stinky britches! I clicked on stuff and the wrong stuff happened! Seriously it’s bad! Configuring stuff is hard!”

    No substance to the above argument
  • 0
  • 1
    It's because the package manager thing under Linux is great for the system, system tools, and DE - but totally sucks for application deployment. The Linux folks still havn't understood that system and applications are quite different beasts, and the container workarounds are even more moronic.
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins you are kinda right. Except also not. Let me explain by example:

    I have a windows 7 installation on my work PC since 2014, it works like a charm. No errors, no bluescreens not a single fucking problem. Admittedly I'm not the kinda guy to install all sorts of junk like screensavers torrents and all kind of crap and I also have webroot and it's behind two firewalls so the chances of something happening are zilch. But it fucking works every damn single day since years ago and it never fucking fails.

    I use this machine sometime to fix open source shit that either never worked, worked and stopped, or trying to get new open sourcee shit to work and so on. 95% of it based on linux which is accountable by itself (and underlying shit such as gcc libs OS packages what have you) for about 30% of the shit that doesn't work.
  • 1
    An example within an example: apache (linux web server) docs say Include directory/*.conf will load the files in alphabetical order. FALSE. Just spent 2 hours today trying to figure out what the mistake was. There wasn't any, when including * it didn't work and when including each file in alphabetical order it works.

    So FUCK apache and because of this particular example and MANY others, implicitly FUCK linux too.

    If all this shit worked like my work windows box does I would spend several thousand hours less each year using this windows box to fix these linux shits. I could use that time for so many other things.
  • 6
    @molaram I’ve had the opposite experience. I have used both windows and Linux for 25 years and I have by FAR had a much more painful experience in windows, though there were some bright spots, namely windows 2000 and windows 7. The type of issue you describe with Apache I have screamed and pulled out my hair over and over again for the better part of my life, and there was no source code so no recourse for figuring out why some POS software wasn’t doing what it said it would do. I have been paid more money than you would believe for disassembling probably more microsoft and 3rd party windows application software and debugging it to understand how it works, and have made more binary modifications than you would ever believe just to make it meet basic needs.

    Equating apache to Linux is not really fair either. Personally I have used Apache for 25 years and never had a problem but it is not Linux and is not part of the operating system. That would be like me blaming windows because GTA IV crashes, not that it’s impossible in general for this to be the OSs fault. If I had to guess this is most likely a user error. No basis for that, just 99% if the problems I fix on a daily basis are firmware engineers complaining about how awful everything is and it turns out there C code is illegal. You get tired of it.

    I have found that even when the windows ecosystem works it ends up not mattering because it wasn’t designed from the ground up to be flexible, and yet it is no less complex. I can never get it to meet my needs. And bill gates has gone on the record in support of NSA/FBI surveillance, also the worst thing you could possibly support. To me that is the worst insult anyone could ever use to describe an OS.
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins ofc you are right in your own way. Still that does not change the fact that I am bleeding time and losing hair over this crap. I’m sure I’d have other problems with a winblows setup but right now it’s linux and related shit causing me pain while windows is not. I don’t care what its called, if it doesn’t work i’m going to rant and curse at it every fucking moment until it works. Then hopefully get where i need to at like 60 with my cock still working.
  • 1
    @StefanH I built one of those from parts. They’re definitely nice.
  • 1
    @StefanH i have one too, it's up in the attic next to a compaq z80A and a hc91

    love the sound of them old ass keyboards
  • 0
    @molaram maybe it's the distro ?
    When I used Debian based distros I had issues with lib versions, package conflicts, adding PPAs with packages made for older versions of the system, etc...
    Now on Manjaro everything have been playing nice for 2 years

    Same thing with Firefox, stable sucks balls compared to nightly
    The bleeding edge certainly has its advantages :)
  • 3
    @MagicSowap You know what sucks under Linux? That I can't have "stable" for OS and DE, but "current" for applications. That's because of the misguided package manager crap.

    On a 10 year old Win7 installation, I can install a current browser without problems.
  • 1
    @MagicSowap its centos. if this one can't cut it nothing can. not buying into that rhel crap, it's just money thrown out the window, might as well figure shit on your own rather than wait for some indian fucker to figure out how to pick up the phone

    @Fast-Nop mate linux isn't really made for that type of shit. it barely works as a server, which is what it was made for. people just won't give up trying tho.
  • 1
    Desktop Linux:

    Mint for easymode, Manjaro for a bit more poweruser mode. I've personally used Linux Mint on my macbook pro for the last 5 years, after which I bought a Dell XPS, again installed Mint as soon as it arrived.

    I used to be a hardcore Arch + Xmonad user, but the default Mint + Cinnamon install allows me to get shit done.

    At the risk of sounding like an insufferable fanboy, I honestly think Mint is a better system for a Macbook than OSX, in terms of how much "it just works".

    For servers... eh. Learn to use K8S + Docker compose in one dreary weekend. Enjoy issue-free containers for the rest of your life.
  • 0
    @bittersweet is that elementary os any good?
  • 3
    What OP described kindof sounds like nixos.org
    Every app has it's own directory with it's own files, using exactly the version specified and no global version madness
    The config is specified in one file, that file "creates" basically the entire system, including /etc
    Tho it's a bit flacky, but at least if "compile this yourself" is needed, the way it's built it just does that and thanks to it's way of managing dependencies it just downloads them JIT when it needs them to compile for example, without installation. It's all just a bunch of recipies being built JIT to "create" the global state
  • 0
    @mkg20001 looking at it, looks kinda nice, thanks mate. will check it out very soon
  • 1
    @molaram elementary sucks for anything more than reading emails.
    The packages are so out of date it's a joke.
    The default PPAs contains almost nothing, so you will need to add random PPAs, which is neither easy/user-friendly or good for system stability.
    It's so locked down that it's a chore doing anything other than use the preinstalled apps.
  • 1
    I think some here are being far too harsh on him for it. Even Linus Torvalds states that he does not have time to play with configurations etc and that he just wants to get to work. This is particularly the reason why even though I love Arch and have enjoyed FreBSD in the past, I would not expect any of my developers to use them unless they really wanted to. Far too much shit to do on a daily basis and now you have to memorize manuals to get stuff done? to me it is appealing to thinker with my Linux machines all day, but I can see how it won't be for others, I can't also expect others to go on an spend soooo much time looking around for manuals or obscure forum posts detailing how to solve issues.

    For what is worth :P Mac OS does exactly that, it is a unix like environment suitable for damn near all manners of development you can think and they save their applications inside one folder, for other tools? yeah you will need to understand a bit, but I have found it to be enjoyable for me
  • 2
    What I don't like about this discussion...

    Skipping the boring part - "linux is the kernel, nothing else" - let's take a look at reality.

    Upstream is the project - the raw source code. Out of experience, Most upstreams have a clusterfuck of build configuration. And no, that is seldom the fault of the used software (autohell / cmake / ...): different OSes, different APIs, changing APIs and that over the whole lifetime of the project. Build configuration and testing takes a whole lot of time and is usually the most unwanted job.

    Downstream - the distribution - takes the raw source code and "reshapes" it to fit the distribution. Reshape is meant literally - some distributions apply hundreds of patches...

    Because upstream doesn't accept patches (eg CLA required) / upstream is dead or simply upstream guys are nitpicky arseholes.

    So upstream can be quite different from downstream. But there's more.

    Every home directory is an wonderful clusterfuck, too. Some people ignore the fact that having the same home directory for 15 years / swapping distributions and keeping home and so on can lead to a lot of problems.

    Same goes for copying config files.... Each distribution has it's own ways (eg update-alternatives ) to handle ambiguities, different config folder structures, and so on.

    One of the several reasons I hate stackoverflow... And the copy n paste mentality behind it.

    Soooo.... Putting it together. Yes. It's complicated.

    But pointing the finger at linux - aka the kernel - or at the distribution is wrong imho. It's most of the time the fault of upstream and the lack of manpower... And the sheer magnitude of possibilities which upstream has to support.

    That is the downside of unlimited possibilities ;) and I guess the reason why Snap / Flatpak / ... will get more popular.

    But it's not as dark as it looks. Especially FreeDesktop and the XDG/LSB cleared up a lot of the distribution specific ambiguities.
  • 1
    @IntrusionCM The Linux world: lacking maintainer manpower. Also the Linux world: having gazillions of Linux distros.

    The Linux ecosystem doesn't have a shortage of maintainers - it has a massive surplus of redundant and, for application deployment, outright superfluous work.
  • 2
    @molaram bodhi isn't a bad alternative if elementary caught your eye. It doesn't come with much out of the box but what it does have works well enough and the iso is less than a gig to download. The desktop in particular is really nice, though the defaults don't really do it justice. Doesn't take but a sec to remedy though.
  • 1
    @mkg20001 I thought I had stumbled across something that sounded like that at one point. Couldn't remember where or when though.
  • 0
    @mkg20001 nix has a very interesting approach to packages, sadly some things are not too well executed, for instance developers (main audience) lack an easy way to build, pack and deploy their shit. You have to work with that new language and write a bunch of klingon :( my stuff already have several thousand hours into tooling, moving part of that to nix is too much effort. I hope they come up with smth. Otherwise nixos looks very promising.
  • 1

    About elementaryOS... I hate it. Others love it.

    I think that's one of Linux's most difficult problems: There's choice. So much choice that you start to overthink things.

    Just try it. The average Linux install takes a cup of coffee and a toilet break. If you put your personal files & home directory on a separate partition, and make sure to have backups, it's no big deal to swap out distros.
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop I’m running the latest firefox on debian oldstable which is OLD.

    Also, debian unstable is not particularly unstable and is pretty bleeding edge. I never had any issues living on it.

    There are also a lot of distributions that have solved this problem like nixos and gentoo (which has binary distributions people don’t seem to realize that)
  • 3
    @FrodoSwaggins "A lot of distributions" having to solve that is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Look, I can install a brand-new FF on any 10 years old Win7 without problems, and without MS having to fudge around with it at all.

    The package manager is downright stupid for applications, which is why Torvalds already ranted about that back in 2014 at the DebConf.

    Talking of issues, I had it recently when I wanted to ship a binary for Raspi. Well yeah, the one compiled against Buster didn't work on Raspis running Stretch - glibc problems. Breaking binary compatibility left and right is part of the Linux problem, even with just different versions of the same distro.
  • 0
    This is why archmasterrace.👍
  • 2
    @SortOfTested Yeah by the time someone has mastered Arch, compiling something from source won't be shocking for him anymore.
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop the thing is, shipping all the dynamic libraries with every application IS a solution that works, that’s what windows DOES. And there are Linux distributions that DO that and I named them above.

    That’s a meaningless assertion to say that “I can’t believe Linux even had to solve this problem in the first place” when in fact EVERY operating system that has dynamic libraries has to solve this problem, including windows, and it’s the same solution many Linux distributions have employed, so I reject your premise.

    I can run the latest firefox on an ancient debian too so I further reject your premise.

    In the meantime, the package system solves a very real problem that shipping a copy of every library with every application does not solve, and that’s not having to load the same library hundreds of times for every different process, and that’s why it was originally done. So that you could fit way more in DRAM than a comparable windows machine could.

    Sure ram and hard drive space are cheap now but to declare that there are unilaterally no advantages to doing it this way is also foolish and short sighted.

    If developers want to side step these issues they totally can and many do. If you buy wolfram Mathematica for Linux as I have done you get a big 3gb install (2.9gb of which is a second copy of a bunch of shit you already have on your system) and it just works on pretty much any Linux system since 2.6. I think that’s stupid and wasteful (i.e. like windows) but it works thus I further reject your absolutely wrong premise.

    To say that “I chose the wrong distribution for my tastes and that’s somebody else’s fault” is a VERY questionable argument.
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins I just looked at the Wolfram page - not really a cool example.

    They offer stuff for 4 Windows versions. For Linux, they claim to have tested it on all suported Linuxes, which are 6 distros, and when counting the versions, you end up with SEVENTEEN fucking systems. And they still havn't covered all that's out there.

    The required test effort is just ridiculous, especially when compared to the small market because the year of desktop Linux is always next year.

    Also, your last sentence doesn't make any sense. It's not the application author who choses a distro, it's the user - in a small and then even fragmented ecosystem.

    The user just notices that shit doesn't work, and the only upside is that anyone who has been using Linux for more than web surfing and email doesn't really expect shit to work without fumbling around.
  • 3
    I get the impression that an entire generation of humans saw enter the dragon and said, "man, I want to get my ass kicked like bolo yeong when I grow up."
  • 0
    @SortOfTested I laughed :P

    @Fast-Nop ok where to start...

    Who cares? I don’t see what anything you said has to do with what I said. Yes the user chooses the distribution so you could pick the one that not only solves this problem but improves upon the windows solution by only duplicating the .so when a different version is actually required. You chose not to do that and now you’re mad at us.

    I have already said there are technical advantages to doing it the debian way too. Way shorter elf load -> main execution time and way smaller memory footprint. People WANT that generally. For stuff you don’t care about this just is not a problem that is kernel imposed. It’s a problem imposed by some distributions optimizing for memory footprint and performance. This is just one of the reasons that Linux userland software is often so much faster than windows. So don’t use those if you don’t care.

    Also, when you’re wolfram and you’re shipping the entire binary footprint including all libraries and secondary dependencies, the only ABI and environment you depend on is the kernel. That’s the point of shipping software like that. The testing is more of a formality to say they did. Yes there are more Linux distributions than windows because Linux is a meritocracy. So if they want to do good and test a bunch of stuff for you why do you care? It works on the Linux distribution that I roll myself and I didn’t need their stamp of approval for that. It just worked.

    So going back to what I said before. If you don’t like the distribution you picked that is squarely your problem. You don’t have to accept the limitations of particular distributions unless you want to, but you should at least appreciate why it was designed that way on purpose.
  • 2
    @FrodoSwaggins Look, it's the users who choose their distros, not anyone else. I repeat: I as author DO NOT PICK the distros that users are using.

    Breaking glibc even within versions of the same distro is just the sad reality, and that's already the best case with no further dependencies. Static linkage of glibc however is strongly discouraged under Linux for a number of reasons.

    Also, Raspi is already simple because it's always Raspbian, and even that doesn't work. It's just broken, and you can write at War and Peace length how it's not, I just don't buy it. Actually, your "no no no it's all fine" stance is the number one poison within the Linux community that creates momentary relief, but also perpetuates the problems.

    You know what I as author do? I tell my users: hey, you picked a tinkerer system where "it just works" has no priority, so just build from source. Want a system where shit does work right away? Here are the Windows executables.
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop I don’t freaking get it, you’re complaining about running a latest firefox on Linux. Are you a firefox developer? How and when did this argument change? Are we talking about users or developers?

    If you are a developer have you actually ever packaged anything for a distribution? It’s about the most not hard thing you could possibly do so I’m just dumbfounded that you find this difficult. These tools have a lot of advantages and yes there are limitations, just like everything in life including the way windows software is distributed as I described above. If you spent an hour or two learning about the environment you are developing for you could probably harness those advantages, rather than giving up within seconds because the projection of your windows expectations (both deficiencies and merits) onto Linux was not bijective.

    It’s like windows users expect Linux to be both as good as and suck as much as windows at the same time and it’s merely the discrepancy that bothers them, not that it’s actually worse. Either that or it’s the fact that there are successful engineers out there that know how to use Linux and the ecosystems of various distributions and don’t have these problems that bothers them as your comments seem to indicate. Does it bother you that I’m capable of using Linux and have /not/ had these issues? Serious question. I admit it bothers me that people say they can use windows productively. I legitimately don’t understand how that’s possible after 25 years of disassembling microsoft binaries to figure out why they don’t work ever.

    And last of all, if you don’t want to deal with this, then don’t!! Wolfram doesn’t and their shit works great. Download and unzip on pretty much any Linux box with X11 and whamo it works. What is difficult about this? That is how windows works!!
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins Look, it's not that I don't "get" it. Maybe you believe Torvalds "gets" Linux? See: https://youtube.com/watch/...

    Application deployment is simply utterly broken crap, and you have been used to the crap so much that you don't even notice anymore how shitty it is.

    And no, you didn't address that myriads of distros are doing superfluous AND redundant work just to cope with this crap.

    Also, no, I certainly will NOT even try to address the myriads of Linux distros, let alone test on all the shit. The situation is crap, and I will not invest my time to work around shit that Linux distros have never gotten right (Torvalds' words).

    Actually, the users take it pretty well. It's Linux, working binaries are out of question, compile yourself. You know WHY they accept that so readily? Because they have experienced it before! Because they are USED to "it doesn't work right away"!
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop I just don’t know what to tell you other than DLL compatibility is absolutely an issue in windows too. But all the tools have given up and ship their own dlls with every application, and the built in ones haven’t changed since 1993.

    You can do that in Linux too. It has been done. End of story.
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins Yeah end of story. Just like that. Ooohhh except static glibc linking isn't recommended, and dynamic fails across different versions even of the same distro. Yeah sure, end of story.

    You know, it's your style of problem denial that, at Linux community scale, is the number one reason why the desktop Linux has failed, and why in turn Linux has HW support problems. Congrats, but I'm sure you feel relief from denial.
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop static glibc linking isn’t recommended for two reasons: 1. Licensing, 2. Every application uses it so that’s 600 copies of glibc or more that get ELF loaded right there. That doesn’t mean you can’t do it. You can and I have.

    You know denial is about how I would explain the windows fanboys problem too. I have firmly believed for a long time that in both directions this windows vs Linux thing is not a meritocracy. Humans dong psychologically do change very well so if even their smallest expectations don’t match up 1:1, even if the other side is better in that particular aspect they will cry about it and say the other side sucks. Yes this goes both ways.

    My denial is no worse than your combination of both denial and being wrong :shrug:
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins Oh, being wrong. Just like Torvalds who happens to say the same. I'm so sure that you are so much of a Linux checker that this dwarfs even Torvalds. ^^

    And yeah, of course Windows does have its sucky areas, especially after any Windows post 7. You know why? Because after all of MS' legendary Linux panic from 15 years ago, they finally realised how low the bar actually is on desktop.
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop just going to ignore the premise framing argumentation tactic...

    Linus brags about not caring about his system. He uses Linux mint because he just doesn’t care. And that’s fine, not everybody has to care. That’s the beauty of having options and Linux systems that do work out of the box despite how many trolls are out there insisting they don’t.
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins Wow, your level of denial gets worse, or you havn't grasped the point how much damage this poison has already done for Linux. Or maybe you have, and you're doing that on purpose, who knows.
  • 0
  • 0
    whats up girls?
  • 3
    @Oktokolo just cuz someone is in IT doesn't mean they have to like the headache that comes with using nix.

    Exposure to and a basic understanding is necessary, but don't fall for that hive mentality that we all have to use it because that's bullshit that even Voldemort could smell with his fucked up nose lol
  • 1
    Of course not. But Linux distros normally do not bahave like the OP described.

    Yes, this answer is a literal copy of my answer to deadlyRants.
  • 4
    @Oktokolo I beg to differ lol

    It's literally happened to me too. You try to install something. Starts out with installing some shit like yarn or something to download it. Then you gotta install some other shit except it's broken and then you spend 30 mins tryna fix that to the point you halfway forget what you're initially tryna install.

    It's a very real situation and just bc you've never experienced it doesn't mean it's not happening.

    Windows normally doesn't break but the number of ppl bitching about fuck ups on here begs to differ as well lol
  • 0
    Just try it on Windows then. I come from the Windows world and am a happy Gentoo user now. I know for sure, that the software handling is better on all the big Linux distributions (i use Gentoo because of its extreme flexibility, the bigger distributions are actually way more easy to use).

    A distribution and its package manager really help a lot in installing and updating software.
    On Windows i had to collect the stuff from the Internet myself and if it needed any compiling, i just gave up most of the time, because it would not have been worth the hassle to get the build environment of the week working locally.
    On Gentoo (or any other Linux distri; but Gentoo is a source-based distro, so it's package manager portage is really good at installing and updating applications from source), the package manager installs and updates dependencies and applications just fine most of the time.
    If the application isn't in the official repo, there likely is an unofficial repo having it.
  • 2
    @Oktokolo I am one that deals with all major operating systems and you can surely make windows works for everything just the same.

    Yeah there are some exceptions, you aint building IOS apps on a windows machine that is for sure, but from node to php to .net core to everything in between there are alternatives to unix like environments that just work just fine without as much hassle as Linux provides. Mind you, I have 4 Linux based machines at work, I fucking love it and use that shit as any self respecting neckbeard, but thinking that windows is just outside the ballpark for developers is just too much of a fanatic sentiment to take seriously.

    Source: build java apps, python apps, node.js apps, .net apps, elixir apps, php apps from the comfort of windows without having to fidget with the terminal like a fucking neckbeard for hours on end.
  • 0
    Of course you can get source compiled on Windows too. The existance of Windows developers proves that. Visual Studio still is the best IDE on earth.
    But i experienced it to still be orders of magnitude easier, to get non-binary third-party stuff working on Linux for one very important reason: The comunity almost always already did all my homework. There either is a package handling all intricacies of building everything in the official repository. Or there is one in an unofficial repository. In rare cases i find a working package attached to a ticket in the distribution's bug tracker.
    It may have changed by now, but on Windows there was way less support from the community when i needed to get something to work. That never surprised me, as most software i use, originated in the Linux world and most Linux users seem to hate Windows (i don't)...
  • 3
    @Oktokolo If some software "needs any compiling" under Windows, the software is simply broken. Application devs are expected to deliver ready-made binary shit that works, also with OSS. If they don't, users will simply opt for other SW that isn't a half-assed job. It's not like Windows has a scarcity of applications.
  • 0
    If you don't need to patch or otherwise alter any software you use, you obviously don't need to compile it yourself or install the software's files manually.
    Binaries packaged for an OS/distribution normally run just fine regardless of the OS being a Windows or some Linux distribution.
  • 0
    Try Linux Lizard. htpp://ta98.rf.gd/linuxlizard

    EDIT: htpp is not a thing, i'm retarded.

    oh and the site has no secure
Add Comment