Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cool but obscure X11 tools

cyber.dabamos.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 256 posts

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#191

Post by Accacin »

big_chungus wrote: post #186
Accacin wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, he thinks he's smarter than every one. Wow, are we insulting people like we're twelve now? Again, I have to ask. Why are you not writing a replacement for systemd? Again, another person in this thread seems to think they know everything yet don't seem to have any code to show for it.

>> Also, he thinks he's smarter than every one. > Wow, are we insulting people like we're twelve now? How is that insulting? It's pretty much true. It's not really nice , but it's not really mean either. > Why are you not writing a replacement for systemd? There are already replacements. I use them in several places, mostly openrc. I'm perfectly allowed to grumble that something's bad and pushed into most distros. Pl…

> How is that insulting? It's pretty much true. It's not really nice, but it's not really mean either.

That's the point. It's not insulting and it makes you sound like you're twelve.

> Next time you complain about, say, your car breaking down, I'll be sure to advise you to go build your own car.

No, again. I see you're struggling. When my car breaks down, I ring a mechanic or take it to the garage. I don't go to the mechanic claiming to know exactly why my car broke down and how the manufacturer should change the specification to make it so that it doesn't break again. If my car keeps breaking down, I know not to use that model of car and try something else.

What you're doing is most likely using a piece of software, finding it doesn't suit your particular use case and then going online to insult the creator, and claim that you know how it should have been engineered.

It's completely fine that you don't like systemd. The problem is that a majority of people prefer it and that's pretty obvious from the distributions picking it up.

Stop and think for a while, imagine that's you who's created the software. Do you really think he's an evil genius trying to fuck up your system or is he just a hacker doing what he loves to do?

You also say "They also didn't do a great job of modularity, and don't use dbus like they should (dbus isn't built to be used with an init system; use a socket already). Rather, they have every thing depending on another. Suddenly, everything must re-tool to work with systemd or stop working. It basically unilaterally declared itself the standard.", but don't really have anything to back it up.

For example, Arch Linux reasons for picking up systemd:

    0) it is hotplug capable
    1) we can know the state of the system
    2) it is modular
    3) it allows dbus/udev to go back to doing the task they are meant to do
    4) we can reduce the number of explicit ordering dependencies between daemons
    5) we get a lot of security/sandboxing features for free
    6) systemd service files can be written and distributed upstream
    7) systemd is a cross-distro project
    8) logind will finally deliver on what consolekit was supposed to do
    9) systemd is fast
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1149530#p1149530

Not sure why it declared itself as standard.

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#192

Post by Avamander »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #188
Avamander wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please, it's not like any single other component in Linux desktop is somehow more secure. If anything, most stuff on Linux desktops are majorly more buggier and unsafe, they're just less popular in most cases.

Desktop code can be expected to fail sometimes. Core system components that orchestrate everything , should not. Ever. This requires disciplined programming that doesn't assume the stack is a limitless resource free to abuse and fill with tainted data.

Even Linux kernel has had tons and tons of vulnerabilities and bugs. Not to mention non-systemd core system components and services have been found exploitable times and times again. You can't set higher standards for systemd than other core pieces of software, it's simply not fair.

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#193

Post by Izkata »

BubRoss wrote: post #94
vnorilo wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always wondered about this sentiment about software you are free to use or not. Or is it the fact that a majority of others, or those that have the power, choose for you by making life harder if you deviate? Shouldn't you curse those people, instead of the creators of the software?

A lot of software can feel like a bait and switch. To keep compatibility you have to use windows, but the quality goes up and down. Bundled IE, windows ME, then XP which people loved, then Vista, then windows 7 which people loved again, then windows 10. There isn't nearly as much freedom of choice when it is an all or nothing game and things are changing underneath you. Windows 10 reverts your settings after doing fo…

Also, Windows 8 (so bad you forgot it existed?)

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#194

Post by temac »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #107
microcolonel wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For clarity, Lennart Poettering is an extremely prolific guy that people somehow love to hate. At the end of the day, his critics either use his software begrudgingly, or use somebody else's to their own detriment, just to spite him. I take some time every year to thank Lennart for systemd and PulseAudio; I remember when the grass was parched brown on my side, green has been a welcome change!

After his foolish use of alloca() in systemd was revealed, it's clear that the derision is well deserved. One would think that after cutting his teeth on PulseAudio he'd have learned how to write safe, system level C.

There is even more depth to the alloca() fiasco than most people realize.

cppcheck could detect the bug without any hard setup effort (launching it in systemd codebase, with maybe an option to activate all checks, was enough) at least 2 years before it was revealed (probably more like at least 3 or 4, I don't remember the exact value). That's a fact easy to verify.

I suspect other tools could find it too, though I have not checked.

What that implies is more speculative, but there are some kind of "either or" situations that are extremely nasty. For example either RH (and all the other distro using it) did not analyse it, or they hid it for other reasons. The most reasonable hypothesis is that they just did not analyzed it. Which put them at least 15 years behind MS in some domains that were even more critical at the time (and still today) than 15 years before.

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#195

Post by saltcured »

drewg123 wrote: post #48

I still use xv to open images from the command line. Its like muscle memory.

I switched to the "display" command from the various image/graphics magic packages years ago, and now am frustratingly finding it has become unstable.

But, recently seeing some PBS specials on NASA and the planetary probes made me reminisce about "xv". I remember having downloaded images of the Shoemaker-Levy comet impact on Jupiter and browsing them with xv...

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#196

Post by [deleted] »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #107
microcolonel wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For clarity, Lennart Poettering is an extremely prolific guy that people somehow love to hate. At the end of the day, his critics either use his software begrudgingly, or use somebody else's to their own detriment, just to spite him. I take some time every year to thank Lennart for systemd and PulseAudio; I remember when the grass was parched brown on my side, green has been a welcome change!

After his foolish use of alloca() in systemd was revealed, it's clear that the derision is well deserved. One would think that after cutting his teeth on PulseAudio he'd have learned how to write safe, system level C.

[deleted]

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#197

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

Avamander wrote: post #192
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Desktop code can be expected to fail sometimes. Core system components that orchestrate everything , should not. Ever. This requires disciplined programming that doesn't assume the stack is a limitless resource free to abuse and fill with tainted data.

Even Linux kernel has had tons and tons of vulnerabilities and bugs. Not to mention non-systemd core system components and services have been found exploitable times and times again. You can't set higher standards for systemd than other core pieces of software, it's simply not fair.

The Linux kernel has high standards. Most of the bugs come from the drivers. If systemd wants to be the end all be all init replacement it should have known from the start that it needed to meet a high bar of code quality.

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#198

Post by jwr »

Fnoord wrote: post #14
throwamay1241 wrote: post #10

For those looking for obscure-but-useful, checkout xdotool. `sleep 2; xdotool type "foo"` is super handy for typing passwords into virtual machines which don't support guest additions. I'd rather not elaborate on the filthy things I've made it do, but rest assured you can use it to do some quick and dirty automation tasks if you really need to :)

Autokey (Python) gives you similar power as AutoHotKey on Windows and Karabiner Elements/Hammerspoon on macOS. Problem is, that you might want Wayland support, as X is on the way out. [1] https://github.com/autokey/autokey

One of the three major reasons why I use Mac OS rather than Linux is the existence of Keyboard Maestro and TextExpander, which do tons of useful things and work everywhere. (if you care, the second reason is working system-wide clipboard and the third reason is Emacs keybindings in ALL dialog boxes and inputs).

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#199

Post by [deleted] »

liability wrote: post #129
pjmlp wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the myth of the UNIX way, never followed upon commercial UNIXes and somehow became a cargo cult on FOSS community only thank to a book of UNIX idols?

Right, the only true Unix philosophy which ever described reality was "worse is better." Just look at the GNU coding guidelines, it explicitly mentions that GNU tools are not to use static buffers and silently truncate long lines. Why? Because that's what proprietary Unix implementations were doing at the time! Silent truncation of long input lines! Is that "doing one thing and doing it well" (DOTADIW)? Hell no! DOTA…

[deleted]

Re: Cool but obscure X11 tools

#200

Post by yesenadam »

Accacin wrote: post #182
netsharc wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please be advised, I've downvoted your comments asking "if you know better, where's your code?", because I think that line of argument is absurd and has no legitimacy. To use some analogy, imagine I, a non-cook, have been invited to a restaurant by friends. After the meal I say to the waiter "this food is way too salty!", and he replies, "Oh yeah, then go in the kitchen and replace our cook!". What, you think we all…

No, your analogy isn't correct though. You're broadcasting your opinion on an online message board, not just a waiter. Plus, you're paying for the food. It's nothing alike. The parent comment is basically implying that the cook has cooked the dish completely wrong and that he (a non-cook) could do a better job of cooking that dish. Plus, isn't this the great thing about open source? If someone doesn't like systemd, t…

I think most people on here prefer–and I often see people asking for–an explanation of why they were downvoted. It seems those explanations usually do good. "Please don't comment about the voting on comments" refers to complaining about other people's downvotes.
Post reply on HN