The Linux Thread - The Autist's OS of Choice

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
prollyanotherlurker said:
Depending on how active the development the maintainer of the program is. Like debian, and it's forks will be 2 years behind where, arch, and void are.
Click to expand...
This gets repeated a lot but isn't true. Yeah, Stable is "old". Testing and Unstable are not, nor is Stable with backports.
 
Is FSR4 rolled into drivers yet or do I still need mesa-git and ge-proton? A lot of guides are a couple months old now.
 
Max Weber said:
I might be wrong, but I don't think Windows searches recursively, it's either in PATH/binary's directory or it's not.
Click to expand...
It's far more complex than that and depends on the type of application... and if an application passes a full path to the LoadLibrary function when loading a DLL (which could be done by looking at where the exe is running from and then dynamically determining a path relative to that, or indeed in theory by searching recursively through subfolders in the folder the exe is running from), then it can load DLLs from an arbitary folder within the application folder. I've run across a few applications that do that rather than installing/registering DLLs in the past.
 
⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛ said:
It's far more complex than that and depends on the type of application... and if an application passes a full path to the LoadLibrary function when loading a DLL (which could be done by looking at where the exe is running from and then dynamically determining a path relative to that, or indeed in theory by searching recursively through subfolders in the folder the exe is running from), then it can load DLLs from an arbitary folder within the application folder. I've run across a few applications that do that rather than installing/registering DLLs in the past.
Click to expand...
Well, of course you can do whatever you want in your own logic, I was talking about if you just leave it to the OS.
 
analrapist said:
You new to Linux? Add . to PATH and LD_LIBRARY_PATH and you can have this behavior
Click to expand...
Going by the fact that you gave the most simple, commonsense solution that should work... I take it you haven't actually tried this.
I feel it would be spoiling things to describe the rabbit hole you end up down if you try to make this work as intended.
 
analrapist said:
This gets repeated a lot but isn't true. Yeah, Stable is "old". Testing and Unstable are not, nor is Stable with backports.
Click to expand...
I know they have testing, and backports. But why would I use Debian, and not use stable? I would rather just use arch and have their repos if I'm going to do that it has. Or use void, and have a slightly slower rolling release, Gentoo, alpine edge, opensuse tumbleweed, just normal fedora with it's shorter release cycle.

There are so many choices that don't use Debian's normal model, I don't know why you would use Debian over those if you aren't going to follow the way Debian does things by default?
 
Kosher Dill said:
I take it you haven't actually tried this.
Click to expand...
I've relied on it in development. Yes, there are snafus, but welcome to glibc's dynamic linking. I take it you don't actually have a use case for this insane behavior you want, given that you chose to be an obtuse shithead instead of a problem solver.

prollyanotherlurker said:
I don't know why you would use Debian over those if you aren't going to follow the way Debian does things by default?
Click to expand...
Nigger, I've put more hours on Sid than Stable, and would recommend it before any other .DEB distro other than Stable unless you're an idiot.
 
Debian's unstable channel is handled with a lot more caution than Arch from my experience. Not that it isn't possible to have a "stable" Arch experience, it just requires best practices more-so than the other distributions in the top five.
 
prollyanotherlurker said:
I know they have testing, and backports. But why would I use Debian, and not use stable?
Click to expand...
Stable is for if you want rock solid, predictable behaviour for long-term appliances or services that won't see the touch of human hands for years at a time. Unstable is "normal", for want of a better word. The sort of position a daily driver OS would occupy; well-tested, not bleeding edge, but mostly up to date. Blame autism for the nomenclature.
 
analrapist said:
I've relied on it in development. Yes, there are snafus, but welcome to glibc's dynamic linking. I take it you don't actually have a use case for this insane behavior you want, given that you chose to be an obtuse shithead instead of a problem solver.

Nigger, I've put more hours on Sid than Stable, and would recommend it before any other .DEB distro other than Stable unless you're an idiot.
Click to expand...
Doesn't really answer why you would use that instead of literally any other distro that does a rolling release by default.

Trans Fat 41g said:
Debian's unstable channel is handled with a lot more caution than Arch from my experience. Not that it isn't possible to have a "stable" Arch experience, it just requires best practices more-so than the other distributions in the top five.
Click to expand...
There are quite a few rolling release distros other than arch that I mentioned. That aren't as close to mainline as arch.

I've just ended up using arch because over my time using it. I haven't seen the breakages people talk about.
 
teriyakiburns said:
Stable is for if you want rock solid, predictable behaviour for long-term appliances or services that won't see the touch of human hands for years at a time. Unstable is "normal", for want of a better word. The sort of position a daily driver OS would occupy; well-tested, not bleeding edge, but mostly up to date. Blame autism for the nomenclature.
Click to expand...
Well that explains why I always had a bad time dealing with Debian. Guess I'll try using "Unstable" next time for that Ubuntu/Mint level of "up-to-date enough" experience.
 
prollyanotherlurker said:
Doesn't really answer why you would use that instead of literally any other distro that does a rolling release by default.
Click to expand...
- Because it's the basis for most of the Linux versions people actually use, so when someone gives Linux advice, it's most likely to apply.
- Because you run Debian stable on a server and don't want heterogeneous distroes.

Slav Power said:
Well that explains why I always had a bad time dealing with Debian. Guess I'll try using "Unstable" next time for that Ubuntu/Mint level of "up-to-date enough" experience.
Click to expand...
Again, try Stable plus backports: https://wiki.debian.org/Backports It really deals with most of the "problems" people have with Stable. If you want even more bleeding edge than Sid, there's also Experimental: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianExperimental One of the nice parts about Debian is that you can mix and match from all four of stable, testing, unstable, and experimental, if you're willing to deal with the breakage and know what you're doing.
 
analrapist said:
Because it's the basis for most of the Linux versions people actually use, so when someone gives Linux advice, it's most likely to apply.
Click to expand...
If you are running a systemd distro it's probably going to apply to all of them the same. Unless it's specifically advice about using the package manager or something.

Just like how I use the Arch or Gentoo wiki for answers, even when I'm using a distro other than Arch or Gentoo. You could say the arch wiki is a good reason to use arch. Because generally you can find your answer their without even having to ask someone. But like I said. The information is still applicable to any other distro.
 
Trans Fat 41g said:
Debian's unstable channel is handled with a lot more caution than Arch from my experience. Not that it isn't possible to have a "stable" Arch experience, it just requires best practices more-so than the other distributions in the top five.
Click to expand...

That's a fair assessment. Imo if you can find a Arch/Debian Distro that's well maintained and issues quick fixes you seriously have the best of both worlds. CachyOS for me has been my foot in and out of the door of where I have a well maintained distro that can let me fine tune it to my own means. I also heard that the "Debian" style of this is PikaOS.
 
I just use Debian Stable, unless I have hardware that's too new, then I use Testing until it becomes Stable. Heck my file server is still on 10. The couple newer things it needs to run like a database or NextCloud are in containers anyway. I did recently upgrade into a bug it seems like though with my laptop, backports kernels seemed to be causing amdgpu crashes, I ended up pulling firmware from experimental and it seems to have stabilized, maybe.

For non-packaged GUI stuff I usually use AppImages. I don't like how Flatpak seems to require a root daemon as well as doing a bunch of other stuff like auto upgrades, I'm sure it can all be turned off, but I just want to download a thing and toss it on my file server and run it from whichever Linux box needs it. And Snap, well, let's just not talk about that. Non-GUI stuff I usually just use containers.
 
prollyanotherlurker said:
It's an interesting project, but moving to that over xlibre is pretty retarded if you ask me.

Unless someone knows of an actual technical reason to ever pick that over an actual xorg server. I have a feeling it's not for technical reasons. But hey i could be wrong. And I'm not even someone overly hung up on the xorg being killed thing.
Click to expand...
This seems far more forward-thinking from a preservation perspective. Assuming Xorg becomes unviable, a translation layer for older apps may make it easier to keep them usable on wayland when that is the baseline. With that said, if that software becomes completely unmaintained, it will likely struggle to be used on newer linux systems due to other compatibility issues.
 
俺たちファームズでノッテる said:
That's a fair assessment. Imo if you can find a Arch/Debian Distro that's well maintained and issues quick fixes you seriously have the best of both worlds. CachyOS for me has been my foot in and out of the door of where I have a well maintained distro that can let me fine tune it to my own means. I also heard that the "Debian" style of this is PikaOS.
Click to expand...
that's what I consider gentoo. If someone doesn't want to take advantage of a source based package manager, and the use flag options. you could stay on the desktop profile, not change any flags, and just use binary packages. And it's about as stable of a distro as anything I've ever tried. And even then you can pick between openrc, or systemd, which is nice being able to choose not to use systemd. It's still a rolling release, getting constant updates, but it's pretty well tested in my opinion, it's definitely not bleeding edge.

That said, even if you go with binary packages, you have to be comfortable with a command line install, and reading documentation to get things set up. It has the best installation guide I've seen though so it's really not hard at all. Arches install guide leaves a lot more room for the user to make mistakes if they don't know what they're doing than gentoo's.

Or if someone is fine not using systemd at all. Void pretty similar in stability to gentoo from my experience, and you get a tui installer. Opensuse, and fedora, should be as easy to install as any other distro and should be fairly stable while you get either rolling with tumbleweed, or a fairly fast moving release based distro. With those, I think it might matter what hardware you use, and how much having proprietary drivers matter to you, on how viable they are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom