201–210 of 288 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Either static or dynamic is fine, package management has to be solved at another layer a la Nix.
Nix is effectively transforming dynamic binaries to static ones. Might as well skip the step, stop pretending that drive space is expensive, and link everything statically.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's exactly what proton is for: bootstrap a linux gaming ecosystem without having to port thousands of games
That only works if studios ever bother to write native Linux games, otherwise is like being happy MAME supports Linux.
If Valve gets gaming studios to target proton and guarantee compatibility, is a win.
If that's equivalent to gaming studios explicitly targeting MAME and QAing it, I'll take it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can see that, but it's a complex situation and I have counterpoints. - Young male angst has no shortage of outlets. Sports, both extreme and normal, tons of existing media, pirated media, blowing stuff up, etc. Taking away Steam accounts likely isn't going to turn them into revolutionaries. - In response the existing comments from Russians, that could be selection bias. Many of them could be commenting normally or…
So, the users of Steam and what they post on their public pages, is selection bias when judging the usefulness of communicating with... the users of Steam?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shared libraries can reduce load time as they might already be in page cache. There’s also potential for a small impact in reduced instruction cache misses. On the other side, link time optimization on static libraries allows deletion of unused functions and more aggressive inlining, so you might get that performance back and more.
Not only that, but executable images are demand-paged anyway. You can link 1 GB of static library code if you like; you won't pay the penalty unless and until those functions are actually called. The whole debate is just stupid. If it inconveniences even one fewer user , then static linking is the way to go, because of the sheer number of drawbacks that shared libraries bring. Nobody cares how big the executable is.…
Also there is value in being able to fix a library without having to recompile everything.
Linus at DebConf 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=310&v=Pzl1B7nB9Kc&feature=yo... >I’m on a record saying, that maybe Valve will actually save the Linux desktop. And it’s actually not because I think games are important! I don't care, I don't play games. I think some people do, so games maybe important. But the really important issue is I guarantee you Valve will not make 15 different binaries. And I also guarant…
Why would I use Linux Desktop over Windows Desktop? Because it's FOSS, because of price, UX? I don't get it.
For example it doesn't keep installing "apps" that are just ads for netflix/spotify/tiktok/whatever without me ever having wanted them to appear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Russia is where you draw the line boy do I have news for you! If your standards were universal, you wouldn't be doing business with any company at all.
Especially with entertainment, I haven't understood the anti-Putin sentiment. Is it really in the West's interest to stop exporting soft power there? Sanctions make sense to me, but this particular industry we should make an exception for, I'd say. Authoritarian regimes try to isolate their populace anyways, it'd be a shame to co-opt that.
The world is moving to regional blocks -- a Western block of North America and Europe, a Eurasian block of Russia/India/Iran/Middle-East/China, and the loyalties of Africa/Latin America are where the wars for influence will be fought, with Africa tilting toward Eurasia and Latin America tilting toward the West. Other battle grounds would be marginal areas like Southeast Asia/Pacific Islands and in Europe the balkans. In that context, it makes no sense for the Eurasian block to allow a business to operate domestically from an enemy block. Why on earth would you let them influence your population? For the same reason, Eurasian influence operations are being banned in the West, from Confucian Institutes to Sputnik News.
The main entrypoints to a block will be those nations that have sufficiently rigid control over their domestic populations to feel free with enemy dependencies -- that would be the US and China, both with impressive soft power and sophisticated information control regimes. That is why US made films that are shown in China often have to have different scenes in them - sometimes shot with different endings -- and there are strict limits. China has their own system of deboosting content and their own troll farms. Same for any kind of internet presence and also video games and other media. Likewise, the US has a sophisticated system of banning and other soft "deboosting" of views that run counter to official regime narratives. There is a whole industry to identify counter-narrative views and brand them as "misinformation" that must be rooted out. Russia has a much less sophisticated information space defense system for this, and much less soft power, so for them outright bans and blocks are the only viable option, and this was given to them by the West on a platter. Amazing self-own.
If anyone from Valve is reading this, I'm not a gamer at all, but I bought a (fully loaded) SteamDeck largely to support your efforts, and secondly to have a cool portable computer. It is (in about a week) going to become a game console hooked up to my TV. I could have got an xbox for much less the price, but the openness, power, and linuxyness of the steamdeck was too attractive to pass up :-D Please keep it up! you…
If anyone from Valve is reading this, I'm not a gamer at all, but I bought a (fully loaded) SteamDeck largely to support your efforts, and secondly to have a cool portable computer. It is (in about a week) going to become a game console hooked up to my TV. I could have got an xbox for much less the price, but the openness, power, and linuxyness of the steamdeck was too attractive to pass up :-D Please keep it up! you…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not only that, but executable images are demand-paged anyway. You can link 1 GB of static library code if you like; you won't pay the penalty unless and until those functions are actually called. The whole debate is just stupid. If it inconveniences even one fewer user , then static linking is the way to go, because of the sheer number of drawbacks that shared libraries bring. Nobody cares how big the executable is.…
But the called functions need to be loaded in memory for every process using them, instead of once. Also there is value in being able to fix a library without having to recompile everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
flatpak > appimage for security and updates.
Well you can statically link stuff in a flatpak… a distribution package however gets automatically rebuilt when a dependency changes, if it's statically linked.