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

OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

undeadly.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 339 posts

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#171

Post by zokier »

blackhaz wrote: post #14

I am arguing about this on FreeBSD forums - from an end user perspective. I think the benefits of saving disk space by sharing libraries do not justify the inconveniences we, desktop BSD and Linux users, obtain from being forced to disrupt and upgrade hundreds of installed software packages, just because one single desired upgrade requires to pull its dependencies. The whole ecosystem falls down like a card house - o…

Isn't that the whole point of "stable" distros like Debian and RHEL that you can run apt upgrade/yum update and it'll never break your system? I thought that's the big reason they bend over backwards to backport patches and muck around packages so that they retain compatibility.

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#172

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

Ericson2314 wrote: post #82
blackhaz wrote: post #14

I am arguing about this on FreeBSD forums - from an end user perspective. I think the benefits of saving disk space by sharing libraries do not justify the inconveniences we, desktop BSD and Linux users, obtain from being forced to disrupt and upgrade hundreds of installed software packages, just because one single desired upgrade requires to pull its dependencies. The whole ecosystem falls down like a card house - o…

I have been interested in finding BSD users who are interested in https://nixos.org/nix/ or even a NixOS/kBSD. It solves all these problems and in my view is the continuation of the spirit of the port system. (The problem with bundling isn't disk space, but composition. Individual applications can compose fine, but libraries can't if they link other libraries at different versions, and use those library's types (ABI)…

> a NixOS/kBSD

Oh good, I'm not the only one thinking about this:) My last idea was basically "run nix on top of a BSD (replacing the package manager), then make nix package(s) for the base system". Which sounds doable, actually.

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#173

Post by Mirioron »

ihucos wrote: post #170
blackhaz wrote: post #14

I am arguing about this on FreeBSD forums - from an end user perspective. I think the benefits of saving disk space by sharing libraries do not justify the inconveniences we, desktop BSD and Linux users, obtain from being forced to disrupt and upgrade hundreds of installed software packages, just because one single desired upgrade requires to pull its dependencies. The whole ecosystem falls down like a card house - o…

Generally it could be possible to run single (bloated) applications inside a container. Here is the solution I wrote for Linux: http://zpkg.plash.io/

I think containerization is going to be the future for applications in general. It would certainly make using different versions of Python easier.

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#174

Post by pmontra »

sunaurus wrote: post #160
Avamander wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> praying my Python and other projects survive, just because I want a browser update or a security fix. You mean you aren't familiar with Python's virtual environment system exactly intended for isolating development dependencies from system ones but you're blaming the distribution. Please.

None of my virtualenvs (on Linux or on OS X) survived the 3.7 -> 3.8 upgrade. Are you saying they shouldn't have broken?

Virtualenv lets you use only a Python interpreter that's already installed on your system. Usually the choice is between the latest v2 and v3 interpreter, at least on Debian derivatives. Every virtualenv is autoupgraded each time the OS upgrades its Pythons.

If you want to use multiple versions of Python and pin them, you should use something like asdf [1] and its Python plugin [2]. It's a version manager with support for many languages and more. I used it for Elixir, Node, PHP, Ruby and even PostgreSQL (I need different database versions in different projects.) I never used it for Python because I'm OK with being on the latest version so far.

With asdf I would expect to do something like this

  asdf install python 3.7.5
  mkdir my375project
  cd my375project
  asdf local python 3.7.5 # pick the version to use here
  python3 -m venv py375 --python=~/.asdf/installs/python/3.7.5/bin/python
  ~/.virtualenvs/py375/bin/activate
This virtualenv is going to stay on 3.7.5 forever.

[1] https://github.com/asdf-vm/asdf

[2] https://github.com/danhper/asdf-python

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#175

Post by celticmusic »

jolmg wrote: post #145
celticmusic wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a semantic point. If I sit down in front of my PC and can't do work, it's broken. That I can spend an hour or two fixing it rather than reinstalling is irrelevant.

I see, when you said "break", I thought you meant because of a bug or other error, but now I guess the fact that it needs configuration and learning how to do that configuration is what you're calling broken. Certainly, Arch is definitely not a "it just works" OS. It's a tinkerer's OS. Different distros favor different types of users. By what you said, probably something like Ubuntu or Mint is better, something that…

Why respond in this dishonest manner? When I left Arch I had been using it for over 10 years. I probably still understand it better than you do.

Is your supposition that a "misconfiguration" just "happened" randomly over night?

No, it's a rolling release distribution, software on it will break randomly on updates. You need to read their FAQ, even their official document will tell you this happens and it's not their responsibility due to the rolling release nature of the distribution.

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#176

Post by celticmusic »

tobias2014 wrote: post #144
celticmusic wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Frequently_asked_questi... ? > It is the user who is ultimately responsible for the stability of their own rolling release system. The user decides when to upgrade, and merges necessary changes when required. If the user reaches out to the community for help, it is often provided in a timely manner. The difference between Arch and other distributions in this regard is that Arch is…

This is funny, I could tell exactly the same story the other way around. I came as a 10+ year Debian user to Archlinux because it did too much automagic under the hood that broke and took a lot of time to fix. No breakage on arch because no automagic behind your back. For a long time before using arch I thought too that rolling release might be more unstable, but I have come to the conclusion that quite the opposite…

thankfully I said Ubuntu and not Debian.

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#177

Post by blackhaz »

zokier wrote: post #171
blackhaz wrote: post #14

I am arguing about this on FreeBSD forums - from an end user perspective. I think the benefits of saving disk space by sharing libraries do not justify the inconveniences we, desktop BSD and Linux users, obtain from being forced to disrupt and upgrade hundreds of installed software packages, just because one single desired upgrade requires to pull its dependencies. The whole ecosystem falls down like a card house - o…

Isn't that the whole point of "stable" distros like Debian and RHEL that you can run apt upgrade/yum update and it'll never break your system? I thought that's the big reason they bend over backwards to backport patches and muck around packages so that they retain compatibility.

Perhaps, but in which case this concept actually adds value? Imagine you have a working environment (development, scientific research, etc) carefully set up to do your job. You wish to upgrade, say, your web browser, but now have to upgrade the whole environment. Changing versions can be very disruptive in many situations.

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#178

Post by ownagefool »

zokier wrote: post #171
blackhaz wrote: post #14

I am arguing about this on FreeBSD forums - from an end user perspective. I think the benefits of saving disk space by sharing libraries do not justify the inconveniences we, desktop BSD and Linux users, obtain from being forced to disrupt and upgrade hundreds of installed software packages, just because one single desired upgrade requires to pull its dependencies. The whole ecosystem falls down like a card house - o…

Isn't that the whole point of "stable" distros like Debian and RHEL that you can run apt upgrade/yum update and it'll never break your system? I thought that's the big reason they bend over backwards to backport patches and muck around packages so that they retain compatibility.

Yep.

Imagine you're rolling out *nix 5000 endpoints; change is going to make the problem hard, so the idea is stables ABI/APIs should be the same, so it can like a platform you can build against.

The problem is, browsers pretty much have to be the latest versions, or websites won't work, and most hardware improvements are going to need a new kernel (which to be fair, given linus don't break user space position, is a probably safer than updating userspace), so it doesn't necessarily work for all use cases.

A common approach in webdev has been to keep current, but run a test suite so you know what breaks, and deal with it when it happens, but I don't think the average infrastructure person has kept up with web dev here, and unless you're running containers, you're probably still on a stable OS.

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#179

Post by celticmusic »

kick wrote: post #147
celticmusic wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Frequently_asked_questi... ? > It is the user who is ultimately responsible for the stability of their own rolling release system. The user decides when to upgrade, and merges necessary changes when required. If the user reaches out to the community for help, it is often provided in a timely manner. The difference between Arch and other distributions in this regard is that Arch is…

But I also want to point out that "it hasn't broke in a year" is cute Why be condescending? The above user has a good point, and your view is clearly against the majority of Arch Linux users.

> and your view is clearly against the majority of Arch Linux users.

I just gave a link from their FAQ that clearly states the system will break when packages break and they aren't responsible for it. As another user pointed out, you can go do a search for 'manual intervention' and find years of results on their front page.

Arch Linux users are ok with having their system randomly stop working. I used to be ok with it, until the umpteenth day that I lost half my working day getting the system back up and running.

Re: OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR

#180

Post by celticmusic »

kick wrote: post #159
scythe wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously this is true for "Arch Linux users", but that is a self-selected set of individuals with correspondingly biased circumstances/behaviors etc... I wonder if your statement still holds holds when we change the domain to people who have used Arch Linux at some point in the past? As I understand it, Arch Linux is like having a pet. It requires constant care and feeding to keep it alive but can be very rewarding…

You misunderstand it, then. Arch is stable enough that (unless you're doing stupid things, like grabbing half of your system from the AUR) there will only be a breaking change every three years or so. Just set a cron job to update it for you and you have nothing to worry about. It was literally created for lazy system administrators, and it's only gotten better for them as time goes on.

if that were true their FAQ wouldn't tell you that broken packages weren't their responsibility.
Post reply on HN