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

Chimera Linux

chimera-linux.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 224 posts

Re: Chimera Linux

#191

Post by dreamcompiler »

gosub100 wrote: post #154
wkat4242 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> They don't have the push to constantly changing stuff around for the sake of things like systemd and net-tools. I assume you forgot a word here and intended to write "changing stuff around for the sake of changing things"? I just want to set the record straight: systemd solves the startup-dependency problem. Yes the old default init scripts worked fine for your system (that probably had very few services installed…

> systemd solves the startup-dependency problem

And that's perfectly fine. My problem with systemd is that it didn't stop there; it became this giant monolithic thing that Linux hangs off the edge of. That's Poettering's sin.

Re: Chimera Linux

#192

Post by eternityforest »

NewJazz wrote: post #189
eternityforest wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like Ubuntu Core. I use regular Ubuntu, but it looks like they really want to go all snap all the time, so I expect that in a few years I'll probably be using an all snap system Snap might not be a part of systemd, but it is in the same general category of ultra standardized system software.

Have they addressed any of the complaints about Snap auto-updating and not being able to use 3rd party repositories?

Auto refresh can be disabled globally or per-snap now, the server is still closed source.

I'm not sure why there's no real FOSS alternative to it, but there was an attempt at one point. I've always thought it would be cool to make a torrent-based P2P snap store.

Re: Chimera Linux

#193

Post by pjmlp »

musicale wrote: post #185
pjmlp wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HP-UX Vaults predate BSD jails, IBM ones on their mainframe and micros even more so.

Interesting - I'm not familiar with HP-UX vaults - did they ever catch on in other Unix versions, and did they predate zones in Solaris? How do they compare to Linux containers? That doesn't refute my statement that BSD pioneered containers with jails, as jails were widely used across multiple BSD versions (though they're oddly missing on macOS) before Linux's container architecture existed. I had thought IBM did VMs…

HP-UX Vault were introduced in 1998, it was the other UNIXes that catched up to them, including BSD.

Sadly the way things went, it isn't that much relevant nowadays.

Re: Chimera Linux

#194

Post by pjmlp »

Naijoko wrote: post #187
pjmlp wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also why when on a macOS system I never felt the urge to install Homebrew or something similar, it is just another UNIX flavour.

isnt the macos system called NOT UNIX ? ^.^

https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3700.htm

Re: Chimera Linux

#195

Post by 9dev »

NewJazz wrote: post #179
9dev wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Not really. Which is frankly odd because Poettering definitely has strong opinions about how a distro should be distributed and structured... Curious why he doesn't just do it himself.

I guess he just lacks the time. Maintaining a distro means a long term commitment to maintenance. Although, I guess just building a prototype, or maybe a reference implementation of the thing he writes about, that would be interesting too.

Re: Chimera Linux

#196

Post by prmoustache »

jchw wrote: post #161
prmoustache wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 para…

Well I am far from agreeing about some of Gnome's technical choices but I am posting under the end user position. And I must say that as an end user, the client-side vs server-side decorations hasn't seemed to affect me. On modern apps I am looking for a burger/3 dots icon for settings, on more legacy one a file->preferences of file->settings and that's it.

Even if Gnome/GTK-4 supported server side decorations the problem of the heterogeneous app ecosystem would not be solved and you can observe the same regardless of the DE or even OS.

As a user the only major complaint I would have about Gnome is the regular breakage of extensions. On most distros it isn't an issue but it makes it rather unsuited to rolling release distros unless user is willing to regularly play with his package management config to prevent updates. On my Fedora machines it is not a big deal as the gnome major version is only upgraded on major Fedora version so I usually test with a VM before hand and if there is an extensions I really want to have I'll fix it o just wait a few weeks or months for the extension to be updated (or a fork being made).

Re: Chimera Linux

#197

Post by fransje26 »

gavinray wrote: post #152
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On Void, installing clang results in a massive 120MB libLLVM-15.so along with a number of other hefty shared libaries. 50+ MB, 30+ MB and so on. As such, I have stuck with GCC which requires much less space. Is this any different on Chimera.

Do people really have such a violent reaction to using ~100MB of disk space for one of the most advanced compilers in the world? I have 2TB of internal SSD storage on my laptop, and I can buy extra TB's for $50 each. Why on earth would I balk at 100MB? Some webpages serve half of that in optimized images for crying out loud, lol.

To get a bit of perspective, these peoples should be invited to briefly switch to windows, and to try installing the MSVC compiler...

Re: Chimera Linux

#198

Post by flexagoon »

9dev wrote: post #162
Hendrikto wrote: post #129

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…

There isn't something completely like that, but Fedora Silverblue comes really close (and Universal Blue [1] pushes it slightly closer)

[1]: https://universal-blue.org/

Re: Chimera Linux

#199

Post by marcus0x62 »

arp242 wrote: post #43
torstenvl wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That strikes me as disingenuous. Can you show me even one example of another person using "nonstandard" in this way as applied to a C library ?

You are replying to someone who did, so there's your example. There's a bunch of other people in this thread as well – you really don't need to look very far. "Standard" is one of those words that can mean different things. Insisting on one absolute definition and calling anyone who uses another definition "disingenuous" is not hugely constructive.

> Insisting on one absolute definition and calling anyone who uses another definition "disingenuous" is not hugely constructive.

It's also ironic coming from someone who's opening salvo was to describe a post about musl being "non-standard" as constituting a "serious allegation".

Re: Chimera Linux

#200

Post by shpx »

igorguerrero wrote: post #153
krupan wrote: 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…

This is still the case for example GNU Awk vs OSX (BSD?) awk

And for dd, where it's bs=4m on macOS originally but changes to bs=4M if you install coreutils. I think you can write out the number bs=4000000 if you want a portable command. This argument is effectively mandatory as it speeds up file transfers like 4 times in my experience over the default block size.
Post reply on HN