Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple does have a handful of engineers working with/on open source projects; whether is a part of their official job duties I don’t know. But it is much appreciated. However, to the person doing open source tarballs: please respond to emails and be quicker about uploading thankyouverymuch
> whether is a part of their official job duties I don’t know Certainly. From what I've read here on HN you basically can't publish a line of code (or even star things on Github) ob your own, presumably for secrecy reasons.
Can't you just right click?
701–710 of 765 posts
Re: Can't you just right click?
#702Earlier quoted context omitted.
If an Apple engineer were to compile a variant of Apple’s notarization algorithm where ok means no and no means ok, would the resulting binary notarize its own source fed into it?
Well, if the mechanism is e.g. a blacklist of APIs that shouldn't be used, and a blacklist of known malware hashes (as is the case), then Apple's "is this malware" routine could trivially print "no" for itself. Sorry to the grandparent, but this is nothing like the halting problem...
Re: Can't you just right click?
#703Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why can’t Apple just push that through XProtect?
They can do that if they’ve obtained a copy of the specific binary with malware. But with notarization they can proactively scan for things that look like they might be malware, and follow up with either automatic rejection, or approval followed by manual inspection.
Re: Can't you just right click?
#704Earlier quoted context omitted.
...and if they forget that, they can just edit the source code in "command.com" https://dilbert.com/strip/1994-02-01
GP is basically arguing it's impossible to run arbitrary software which is BS. It's not as simple as it could be, but Apple didn't prohibit it, they just hid it behind a few menus. And if you are too incompetent to click through these then you probably shouldn't be running arbitrary software. That's why the comic does not really apply here IMO.
Re: Can't you just right click?
#705Disabling Gatekeeper From the Apple menu, open the "System Preferences" application. Click on Security & Privacy > General tab. If the lock in the left-hand corner is locked, click on it, then enter your Mac's username and password. This may not be required. Click "Anywhere" under "Allow applications downloaded from:". If you followed Step 3, please click the lock in the left-hand corner to return it to its locked st…
$ sudo spctl --master-disable
Then the “Anywhere” option is visible in the System Preferences UI. But only while active.Re: Can't you just right click?
#706Earlier quoted context omitted.
your perspective is limited IMO, for example you have small tools like a save cleaner utility for The Sims3 , some person made this tool in Java in his free time and shared it for free with the community, why should this dev pay Apple. There are people that make Visual novels,text based games and other indie stuff(without using Apple tools most are Python,Java or Web tech) for free or a few bucks, I think they would…
Before Java was a thing, that utility would have been written in Turbo Pascal, Quick Basic, Visual Basic, C, C++ compiler, none of them available for free. At minimum one would need the Shareware or PD disks tax to get hold of some similar compiler.
Re: Can't you just right click?
#707Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Outrageous is the entitlement of the current generations for not paying for their tools. Sure, but in the case of an open-source developer working on macOS, he has already paid for his operating system; if he is using GCC, he has already paid everything the GCC developers require; why then must he pay extra money to Apple in order for other people to run his software in a straightforward manner on their machines (o…
Because traditionally compilers for a specific OS were extra pay. Ironically that you mentioned GCC, it only came to be, because Sun made their development tools an additional payment to the base Solaris price.
Re: Can't you just right click?
#708Earlier quoted context omitted.
> our opinions of what constitutes "better" are so drastically opposed. I am not sure I follow. You mentioned somewhere else that Lubuntu was the one that gave you the least problems and that you are now using windows. Coincidentally, Lubuntu is the flavor that looks like the most with older versions of Windows. To me it looks like your assumption is that anything that does not look like Windows 2000/XP is "worse". I…
> I am not sure I follow. You mentioned somewhere else that Lubuntu was the one that gave you the least problems and that you are now using windows. Coincidentally, Lubuntu is the flavor that looks like the most with older versions of Windows. > To me it looks like your assumption is that anything that does not look like Windows 2000/XP is "worse" That's a very condescending conclusion to draw. I found LXDE less comp…
It's been at least since 2012 that I had installed Linux and couldn't connect a printer or scanner. Meanwhile my wife's laptop on windows asked to reinstall drivers every time she wanted to print something. Webcams? No problem. Wi-fi? No problem as long as I didn't try to use a chipset that was either too obscure or too new and unsupported.
The one thing that I gave up on having on my laptop is low-latency audio to connect a guitar and use software audio effect processors. But the way I solved this was by using a separate old laptop with a custom kernel dedicated to be my "guitar effect box". I still didn't have to give up my freedoms and I did not have to give up any functionality/comfort.
> But hey, it all has to do with how it looks right?
I believe you when you say that LXDE was snappier than the other Ubuntu alternatives, but were the alternatives slower than whatever version of Windows you have now? That will be very hard to believe.
So forgive me for sounding condescending, but you went with probably the most obscure and least popular Ubuntu flavor - the one that has probably almost to no funding from Canonical and maybe a handful of developers interested on it. What were you expecting, exactly?
If Ubuntu was bad for you, maybe try Fedora? If you wanted a more knowledgeable community, maybe try Arch? Why instead of sticking with your preconceptions of how things should work, you ask what are the others doing that let them be productive on a FOSS Desktop? Why is it that upon hitting difficulties your reaction is to go back to the comfort zone of a proprietary and familiar system?
> only option that is even remotely viable
We must have very different thresholds for defining "remotely viable". From http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2020-05-22-my-new-FreeBSD-la... :
"Is FreeBSD ready for the desktop? Yes and no. Yes, in that I have a very nice FreeBSD laptop where everything works the way I want. But no, in that it took me two months worth of fiddling with this in my spare time to fix some of the "glitches" which arose; while there wasn't anything particularly challenging, I expect that most people would give up long before they fixed all of the issues I ran into. On the other hand, can FreeBSD be ready for the desktop? Absolutely. I've fixed the issues I ran into — and once we have FreeBSD 12.2-RELEASE with packages built for that release the process of bringing up a GUI will be much easier, as well. The biggest thing FreeBSD needs is to have developers acquiring laptops and carefully working their way through the issues which arise; the FreeBSD Foundation has already started doing this, and I hope in the months to come they — and other FreeBSD users — will publish reports telling us which laptops work and what configuration they need."
Re: Can't you just right click?
#709Earlier quoted context omitted.
your perspective is limited IMO, for example you have small tools like a save cleaner utility for The Sims3 , some person made this tool in Java in his free time and shared it for free with the community, why should this dev pay Apple. There are people that make Visual novels,text based games and other indie stuff(without using Apple tools most are Python,Java or Web tech) for free or a few bucks, I think they would…
Before Java was a thing, that utility would have been written in Turbo Pascal, Quick Basic, Visual Basic, C, C++ compiler, none of them available for free. At minimum one would need the Shareware or PD disks tax to get hold of some similar compiler.
Re: Can't you just right click?
#710Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have concrete experience for that? I have only 3 things I hit: - NVIDIA driver updates (or kernel updates while using nvidia) - caused black screen... I dumped nvidia... these are due to crappy nvidia. - Ubuntu deciding to remove old libraries/apps that are not maintained. That's fixed via docker or just keeping an old version. - Major version upgrades (ubuntu 18 to 20) - here I just re-install and it's expect…
> Do you have concrete experience for that? Yes. > NVIDIA driver updates (or kernel updates while using nvidia) - caused black screen... I dumped nvidia... these are due to crappy nvidia. This is a legitimate dispute and I'm not really counting it because as much as I think Linux should have a stable driver ABI, NVidia are being needlessly obtuse. > Ubuntu deciding to remove old libraries/apps that are not maintained…
> Which is not a simple task. Why can't keeping old software be simple? It is in sane operating systems. Hell, even Linux can do it right,
I've wondered about these things, and I think the true reason is that Linux is a source-compatible operating system.
Other OS's solve this by the boring and painstaking task of assuring binary interfaces are stable and remain working. They usually do this by hiring and paying people to do it.
Linux does all compatibility at the source level, and binary compatibility is a little hit or miss. The common way to fix it is to recompile a lot of stuff.
As one example, I installed ubuntu 18.04 and it should be Long Term Stability.... but I did an
apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
and upgraded from a 4.x kernel to a 5.x kernel. I recall all the kernel dump stuff broke