Live data from Hacker News

Chimera Linux

chimera-linux.org

161–170 of 224 posts

Re: Chimera Linux

#161
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks quite nice though yeah, the choice of GNOME makes me a little bit less enthused. I wonder if System76's COSMIC will ever take off enough to be a consideration, as I would really like to see a new stable, pragmatic, productivity + user-focused DE take off. Plasma's a bit too buggy, GNOME feels not so pragmatic and definitely not so user-focused, the rest feel like they lack some level of polish and maintenanc…

Gnome is one of my favorite DE as to me it is so easily usable and efficient with maximise use of the keyboard straight out of the box while still being very practical to use with a tactile screen. I do understand that it may not be for everyone but my understanding is that when people say a desktop is not user focused, what they really mean is it isn't focused to people resistant to changes

I think in general, the GNOME foundation does a lot of good stuff overall, but I do not like the direction GNOME and Mutter have taken. Personally, I think that a lot of modern design is focused more on looking pleasing to UX/UI designers than it is focusing on genuine usability.

As an example, I feel like the usability of GNOME apps with client-side decorations is a lot poorer than the previous more traditional paradigms. The older paradigm may not be flawless, but it was much more consistent across applications, and most importantly, it's very easy to figure out. Trying to figure out how to do things in GNOME applications these days can be an exercise in frustration. I don't really want to play a game where I try to figure out what the trendy way to access the Settings dialog for a program is. Is it going to be somewhere in the global menu bar, or is it going to be on some nondescript button with dots or lines in it, or maybe something even MORE exciting? In the past, the worst thing was having to look through some defacto standard menus to find it. With modern applications, who knows.

Meanwhile, Mutter feels like it is resistant to practical concerns: they dug their heels on on server-side decorations, which did exactly what anyone could've told them it was going to do; now a bunch of applications have no or horribly broken borders on GNOME. I mean look, I know "it's really the application's fault because we said they had to deal with this" but also, I hope everyone understands that it genuinely doesn't matter, the outcome was predetermined based on the input.

On that front, I have a laundry list of complaints over how the direction Wayland has taken in GNOME in general, especially pushing things to clunky and unusable DBus interfaces that don't cover all of the important and already-common desktop use cases well enough. While I understand some of the reasoning, it is extremely difficult to argue that this isn't a focus on developer ideals over what would be ideal for users. Arguing that it's not "waylandy" to have input emulation in the Wayland protocol thus forcing you to use another binary protocol that's similar to Wayland but that you need to negotiate over DBus using desktop portals seems like a step very far in a weird direction when you are literally already speaking to the same compositor that's responsible for _dispatching_ input events.

Old man yells at cloud, but yeah GNOME definitely is "my way or the highway" in every regard, absolutely not a bastion of user-centric design or architecture. And that can be good if that's what you want, but I have a feeling it would be easily displaced by something that had a better attitude toward user concerns and pain points.

Even if KDE is buggy, it's extremely hard to argue it's not more user-centric. I'm wholly unsurprised when I see something like XWaylandVideoBridge coming out of KDE, as it's born out of trying to make things work for users rather than drawing a hardline.

That said, I do personally think GNOME and GTK4 are far better on phones and tablets than desktops. It's funny, because I simply would not consider them good options for desktop applications, but it all makes a lot more sense when you try it with a touchscreen. (That said, I don't view this as much of a saving grace because I've come to the conclusion that convergence is mostly a lie, something that you think is a good idea but in reality it's not; you just get something that's mostly bad on desktop, mostly bad on phone/tablet, or just generally not good on anything. GNOME is closer, IMO, to "mostly bad on desktop.")

Re: Chimera Linux

#162

Even though I do not fully agree, I think this project has one of the most mature, nuanced, and balanced takes on systemd I have seen yet [0]. [0]: https://chimera-linux.org/docs/faq#what-is-the-projects-take...

A Bit OT, but is there something like the contrary to this - a distro actually fully embracing systemd components?

I have spent lots of time with Linux servers. I’m also very pragmatic. systemd has made lots of stuff easier, is highly configurable, maintained and regularly updated, and properly standardised. I acknowledge people who have a need to feel in control or something, but I just want reliable computers that have a single way of doing stuff. They’re cattle, after all.

So I’d really love something with an immutable system image, signed boot, and systemd services top to bottom, along the lines of the thought experiments in Poetterings blog. Is that a thing?

Re: Chimera Linux

#163

Even though I do not fully agree, I think this project has one of the most mature, nuanced, and balanced takes on systemd I have seen yet [0]. [0]: https://chimera-linux.org/docs/faq#what-is-the-projects-take...

Yeah pretty interesting. Personally I never liked systemd because I just didn't see the need for it and I don't like changes forced on me. I'm not a team player and I hate being told to 'just go with the flow'. The whole idea of FOSS for me is to be in control of my computer. Alnd I just don't like the character of Poettering and yes that matters. For a much more extreme example look at ReiserFS. It was totally shitc…

I’ll never understand what that guy did that got all of you in such a frenzy. Because Stallman or Torvalds are such socially apt and charismatic people, or what? Yet all those systemd opponents out there don’t seem to have a particular problem with them.

Poettering might have opinions on what Linux should be that don’t overlap with yours, but systemd solves actual problems and works better than any init script shenanigans that came before. If you don’t agree with this premise, I call your proficiency with Linux into question (don’t take this in spite, please, it’s in no way meant personally).

Re: Chimera Linux

#164
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the APIs of CLI utils is the primary concern, it's worth noting that they say their core userland is provided by "FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD" - so any friction here should in theory just be equivalent to the friction of using a BSD today (or Mac).

it's solely FreeBSD as an upstream for us, though Net/Open are an upstream for FreeBSD itself for some tools the tools have made big strides over the last few decades, so it's nowhere near like it used to be back then

Thank you for your work and let me say how impressed I am with how fast you moved to release 14 of the BSD userland.

Re: Chimera Linux

#165
post #118
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do confess having installed the GNU ports on Solaris multiple times. Unfortunely Aix and HP-UX servers were out of my control, thus scripts had to stay POSIX compatible for anything that had to run across all our servers, or written in Perl.

Oh sure, I still remember getting my first 1/4” tape of the GNU tools source code through the post. This is why it’s so hilarious to me when the kids nowadays complain that MacOS has different command line tools to Linux. “Why can’t they just use GNU?”. Get off my lawn! ;)

Ironically, BSD was already available when GNU was created. Since that is what macOS uses, I guess the question could be “why didn’t everybody just use BSD”?

Re: Chimera Linux

#166
post #162

Even though I do not fully agree, I think this project has one of the most mature, nuanced, and balanced takes on systemd I have seen yet [0]. [0]: https://chimera-linux.org/docs/faq#what-is-the-projects-take...

A Bit OT, but is there something like the contrary to this - a distro actually fully embracing systemd components? I have spent lots of time with Linux servers. I’m also very pragmatic. systemd has made lots of stuff easier, is highly configurable, maintained and regularly updated, and properly standardised. I acknowledge people who have a need to feel in control or something, but I just want reliable computers that…

EndeavourOS seems to be embracing Systemd fairly enthusiastically.

Not an immutable distro though.

Re: Chimera Linux

#167
post #89

If you are along time GNU user (meaning GNU grep, sed, less, awk, find, tar, etc., etc.) this will be way more frustrating than you realize to use. Having lived in the UNIX days, I can still remember the subtle differences in all the command-line tools driving me nuts. This is actually how the GNU tools became popular even before Linux was a thing, you could install them on irix, hpux, sun, any UNIX, and you wouldn't…

I still find it weird / annoying that those commands don't get installed with prefixes by default. At least for awk it's common to have gawk, mawk, etc. installed explicitly. I wish it was common to similarly have bsdtar, gtar, etc. At least in nixpkgs it's easy to reference the right version explicitly for each context, but everything else is a just guessing.

If you use the AUR, you are going to see bsdtar a lot.

Re: Chimera Linux

#168

Even though I do not fully agree, I think this project has one of the most mature, nuanced, and balanced takes on systemd I have seen yet [0]. [0]: https://chimera-linux.org/docs/faq#what-is-the-projects-take...

This is a really neat one. I think the only part that should be more nuanced is > systemd is written to deliberately (ab)use every single non-portable extension under the sun I think this should be split into 2 parts. Linux specific kernel features and userspace extensions (GNU vs. POSIX). Using linux specific kernel features (like cgroups) is good for a linux system. E.g. a common issue with sshd used to be that und…

As a selfish user, I see taking full advantage of all the features of the kernel as a good thing.

OCI container support is one of the things that keeps me so firmly planted in the Linux ecosystem.

Outside the kernel, calling into non-portable extensions should only be done with good reason. One of my favourite things about Chimera is its rejection of most of the GNU specific ecosystem.

Actually, I do not like GNU specific stuff in the kernel either. It should be possible to compile the kernel with multiple compilers.

Ironically, with the addition of Rust in the kernel, most distributions will have to use both LLVM and GCC to create a kernel whereas Chimera can use LLVM for both. Hopefully by the time important Rust code starts to ship in Linux, GCC will have a proper Rust front-end.

I am all for one “most popular” Linux distro that new users can be directed to and that commercial interests can support. Linux ubiquity is being held back by “fragmentation” in that way. That said, I want the ability for myself to choose other ways of doing things ( knowing the convenience I am giving up to do so ). I want focussed projects to be able to innovate. Even if we have a “most popular” option, I do not want a mono-culture.

You can have an all systemd system. It can be the norm. Please do not take away my ability to do something else. At least, do not do it without a good reason.

Re: Chimera Linux

#169
post #73

> Chimera is a general-purpose OS born from unhappiness with the state of Linux distributions. https://xkcd.com/927/ It seems to have a nice build system. But I am not sure this solves any issue any other distribution has. And with the amount of opinionated choices this distribution has I imagine there are few who it fits. I think for many, Void would be a better choice. They do defend/document their choices well. Th…

chimera is designed to solve many issues other distros have; this includes e.g. the poor state of toolchain security hardening (you won't find any other distro with the same practical scope that's more strongly hardened in builds) cbuild is also designed to solve real issues, particularly proper sandboxing and linting of builds to allow for a small team to maintain it while at the same time being fast and ensuring co…

I think your build system already puts you way ahead of many distro's. And I think there can only come good for depending less on mainstream GNU utilities/libraries and systemd tools. I for one completely agree that the sourcecode of most BSD utilities is far more readable than GNU's. And it's a shame systemd is so dependant on the mainstream stack.

As for architectures, do you not run into many architecture specific problems?

I think Chimera Linux is definitely a project I want to keep an eye on.

Re: Chimera Linux

#170

Interesting take on SystemD. I personally find it very helpful, but one of its major downsides as a project is that it is, to borrow a quote from Benno Rice, "aggressively Linux-specific". That said, it appears their own software choices prevent them from using it as summarized in the following quote: > That’s why one of the goals in Chimera is to implement the actual useful systemd functionality, but independently a…

Nobody is going to use SystemD on Mac or Windows so why does it matter if it is Linux specific?
Post reply on HN