OpenBSD won't update Firefox, advises users to switch to ESR • Hacker News Board

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

#291

Post by the_why_of_y » Sun, Jan 12, 2020, 10:58 PM UTC

School-Cotton wrote: post #267

the_why_of_y wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust language editions are similar but not equivalent to C++ standard versions, because compiling code written for an old edition with a new edition is not guaranteed to work, due to breaking language changes like new keywords. But you are correct to point out that old Rust editions will get new language features if they do not break existing code. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/12/rust-2018-is-here/ The release proc…

> compiling code written for an old edition with a new edition is not guaranteed to work, due to breaking language changes like new keywords. This is not at all similar to C++ standards, and the specific case being discussed in this post demonstrates exactly why! Barring bugs in implementations, developers could develop against whatever version of the compiler they like, and as long as it supports the same language v…

Okay, I see what you mean; I guess if I were a Rust programmer I'd solve that by using rustup to install a fixed Rust release for development.

However the Firefox project has decided to always require the latest stable Rust release. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22022834

In practice for C++ I've found it expedient to whitelist some subset of functionality from newer standards, because there's often useful features that already work in the major 3 compilers, but it'll be another 3 years until the last of the compilers adds the last obscure bits for full support of the new standard.

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

#292

Post by bscphil » Sun, Jan 12, 2020, 11:01 PM UTC

celticmusic wrote: post #180

kick wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't think that's true at all. If you use Ubuntu, broken packages are ultimately your responsibility unless you're paying for support from Canonical. In both Ubuntu and Arch Linux, changes will be handled carefully by the maintainers to try to avoid breakage where at all possible. The difference is basically that on Arch you're supposed to be able to handle basic sysadmin tasks yourself, which means that Arch Linux will ship breaking changes (with a mailing list warning) that require you to run a command or two yourself. Even with that qualifier, this is uncommon.

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

#293

Post by bscphil » Sun, Jan 12, 2020, 11:06 PM UTC

swsieber wrote: post #238

celticmusic wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I left arch linux because I got tired of all the breakages, so not a great example.

Oh man. This seems to have spawned an anecdota war. I think the main issue/benefit with arch linux is that it wont try to do anything for you, except give you extra instructions for when a package change requires "manual intervention". I put that in quotes because I don't think of that as breakage, I think of that as normal upkeep. We'll, as long as it's listed. Anyway, the implications are that things can be stable…

> But there will be times (though I haven't experienced it myself), where something unexpectedly breaks, and it'll be hard to recover unless you know what your doing...

The thing is, my experience with Ubuntu is that there will be times when something unexpectedly breaks, and because of the added complexity, it will be nearly impossible to recover even if you know what you're doing.

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

#294

Post by mekster » Sun, Jan 12, 2020, 11:18 PM UTC

AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #247

MegaDeKay wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How long ago was your experience? That might be a factor. I have been using Arch for a long time, and if my memory serves, stability was a bigger issue years ago than it is now. These days, I have found Arch to be really solid.

That might be a factor, yes. Last time I tried Arch was around 2015. However, I come from a business perspective here. You really don't need an operating system that introduces new versions on a whim in the middle of operations. There's a reason businesses run RHEL/Centos or macOS and whatever has LTS in Windows land: cost of maintenance and reliably wide windows of no possible breakage. As a business, it's kind of a…

Apparently businesses don't use rolling distro.

You don't want your PHP version to endlessly get updated during your operation when you build your app at a specific version.

It would mean not only you have to take care of distro update gotchas but you have to go through all the breaking changes the language introduces.

Stick with LTS. Rolling is for enthusiasts, though Arch does have put decent efforts on their wiki but I did find errors on minor pages that didn't make it work as written.

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

#295

Post by mekster » Sun, Jan 12, 2020, 11:25 PM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #256

celticmusic wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I left arch linux because I got tired of all the breakages, so not a great example.

Strange, the story has been quite the opposite for me, Since I moved to Arch Linux I only had one minor breakage (bluetooth) that was fixed in a day, whereas in Ubuntu I cannot count how many times an update or a PPA broke something.

It depends if your Ubuntu is LTS or not. I'd say LTS Ubuntu > Arch > non LTS Ubuntu as Arch tries to be stable on its only version but Ubuntu can be more aggressive between LTS.

PPA breaking is apparently not Ubuntu's fault.

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

#296

Post by sandov » Mon, Jan 13, 2020, 12:01 AM UTC

abtinf wrote: post #61

sandov wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll go one step further: The whole "centralized, trusted repository that has all your apps" system is wrong at a fundamental level. The way shared libraries are used in Linux is built upon the assumption that package managers and centralized repositories are the right way to do things.

Why are they “wrong at a fundamental level”?

Because they impose a middleman between the application developer and the user.

I don't want a middleman, I want to get my programs from the developer, and store them using the tools I know (regular files on a filesystem).

Are package managers easy to use (most of the time)? Yes.

Are package managers (as they exist today) a universal, well designed way to distribute software? No, because they impose a middleman.

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

#297

Post by sandov » Mon, Jan 13, 2020, 12:05 AM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #64

Analemma_ wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, and I think that people are too emotionally invested in the package manager concept to back out now. I mean, for years Linux proponents have been touting it as the key advantage over software distribution on Macs/PCs.

I think the empirical evidence is against you here, though. If package managers weren't a good way to do things, brew wouldn't exist. Neither would the Mac app store, or whatever the equivalent on Windows is these days. As a Debian user, I appreciate that the stuff I install had at least gone through some minimal vetting first. And if I have to add a third party repository or download something myself to run, I'm muc…

> If package managers weren't a good way to do things, brew wouldn't exist.

Package managers are an easy way to do things, most of the time. That's why brew exists.

They are not a universally good way to distribute and install software. It twists the relationship between the software developer and the user.

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

#298

Post by celticmusic » Mon, Jan 13, 2020, 12:15 AM UTC

jolmg wrote: post #290

celticmusic wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 r…

What's dishonest about it? I'm trying to understand the issues that you mean, and the need to configure before getting to work is what I understood you to mean as broken. I'm not talking about misconfiguration; that's different. You emphasized that if you couldn't get straight to work then it was broken. When I can't get straight to work, it's because I need to configure something. I'm using "configure" to mean any s…

no one else in this conversation has the same "misunderstanding" that you do. Go ask them for clarification.

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

#299

Post by celticmusic » Mon, Jan 13, 2020, 12:20 AM UTC

GarryShawn wrote: post #269

wolrah wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To keep the anecdotes going, I've been using a mix of Debian and Ubuntu, both stable/LTS and testing/biannual, for pretty much exactly the same 15 years as you've been running Sid and I've never had any breakage that wasn't caused by me fucking around with binary drivers. ndiswrapper was the main cause back in the day, shockingly giving Windows drivers access to the Linux kernel can cause problems. The most recent ti…

I'm not old enough to be able to run a Linux distribution for 15 years. And I also never run Debian on any of my personal computers. Thus, my anecdotes are definitely way less convincing. In other words, you can stop reading here. The only two major distributions that I used for a sufficient amount of time are Ubuntu and Arch. Arch "unstableness" is exactly what I want most of the time on my personal computer as it's…

This is the proper response, imo.

Arch is rolling release and you take the good with the bad. The ones who try to defend arch as some paragon of stability miss the point that Arch's model is inherently unstable, but it comes with other benefits.

I'm the one who kicked off this entire conversation pointing out that arch is unstable, and it cracks me up watching silly people scramble to try and defend Arch as being some paragon of stability.

No, it's not. That's baked into its identity.

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

#300

Post by celticmusic » Mon, Jan 13, 2020, 12:28 AM UTC

AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #285

shakna wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The dist-upgrade is something you can plan for and set time aside for. The risky rolling mini upgrade every couple of weeks you can not. I can plan for it? You can see if you're upgrading your kernel. Nothing breaks if you decide not to run an upgrade.

And then I sit with a hopelessly old system I dare not to touch because I dread the day I have to do that kernel update or that one update that pulls in a new libc, leading to an upgrade orgy. I have seen that plenty of times. This nonsense is why stable and LTS releases were introduced in the first place. If I'm faced with a major upgrade of an LTS system, I usually choose to reinstall from scratch, shedding package…

this reply 100% mirrors my thoughts on the matter, all the way down to preferring re-installs over dist-upgrade's.

I like Linux, I don't dislike dealing with the OS. But I want to deal with it on my time. Expecting to get work done and then realizing something is broken and being forced to deal with it is a completely different proposition from picking out a weekend to reinstall your work PC with the newest LTS version.