Live data from Hacker News

Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

omakub.org

11–20 of 55 posts

Re: Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

#11
post #5

Install it with: wget -qO- https://omakub.org/install | bash No, won't execute scripts from people which know basically nothing about security...

Is " git clone https://github.com/basecamp/omakub.git ~/.local/share/omakub && source ~/.local/share/omakub/install.sh " any better for you?

Re: Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

#12
post #6

Alacritty is not a good terminal. It lacks support for several sensible protocols, such as keyboard disambiguation (guests cannot discern between e.g. ctrl+I and tab). Foot is probably a competent terminal with somewhat similar goals to Alacritty (the VT library is incredibly fast, which seems to make up for the software rendering).

How about Terminator? I've been using it for years and never encountered any issues, but I'm curious how it rates in your ranking of terms... ?

Re: Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

#14
post #5

Install it with: wget -qO- https://omakub.org/install | bash No, won't execute scripts from people which know basically nothing about security...

have you seen the script? It's super intrusive and reconfigures your entire system, including personal config files.

The usual argument against curl|bash scripts is that they don't respect program boundaries, may do unknown system configuration that would affect other programs, and could be impossible to remove.

And "initial system setup" scripts like this one do all those things _on purpose_.

Re: Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

#15
post #3

Cool, let's make one for arch

I wonder how hard it would be to abstract the intent from the particulars of the distro being used. And then implement adapters for Arch, Slackware, Fedora and arrive at the same final polished setup.

Our machine bootstrap script at work supports Arch, Ubuntu, Debian, Pop OS, and more thanks to Homebrew. The only thing that uses the package manager is when installing Docker.

In fact the scripts for Linux and macOS are almost identical.

Re: Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

#16
post #6

Alacritty is not a good terminal. It lacks support for several sensible protocols, such as keyboard disambiguation (guests cannot discern between e.g. ctrl+I and tab). Foot is probably a competent terminal with somewhat similar goals to Alacritty (the VT library is incredibly fast, which seems to make up for the software rendering).

How about Terminator? I've been using it for years and never encountered any issues, but I'm curious how it rates in your ranking of terms... ?

No idea, I have never used it.

Re: Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

#17
post #7

I don't see why anyone would want to use someone else's personal setup, but cool. Also not a fan of introducing new Linux users to wget | bash ...

I would. I hate setting up. I would like to use linux but with good enough defaults.

This is no difference than windows or macOS having the usual defaults.

Re: Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

#18
> Turn a fresh Ubuntu installation into a fully-configured, beautiful, and modern web development system by running a single command. That’s the one-line pitch for Omakub.

Most webdev tools are written in JS (or at least used to be). Web browsers run JS just fine. Webdevs, then, should be striving to make sure that their JS-based tooling actually runs in the browser—instead of targeting the non-standard, ever-shifting, and unreliable APIs of NodeJS et al.

There's not an especially good reason that you shouldn't be able to build 80% of the projects on GitHub that belong to this milieu by simply:

1. downloading a copy of the source code

2. opening README.html

3. following the instructions in the workspace on the resulting page that says "to build this project, drag and drop the project folder here"

NPM/NodeJS programmers so desperately wanted to be taken seriously that they reimplemented wholesale all of the bad, fiddly things about toolchain installation, configuration, and maintenance that afflicts all other platforms/stacks that didn't have the it-just-sort-of-works-for-everyone strength that browsers have (and is largely the reason why so many webdevs choose to target browsers in order to reach end users in the first place). The perverse irony of this might be amusing if it didn't result in so many pointless excursions and wasted hours of human potential spent nursing the unfortunate status quo associated with `npm install`, yarn, etc.

Re: Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

#19
post #18

> Turn a fresh Ubuntu installation into a fully-configured, beautiful, and modern web development system by running a single command. That’s the one-line pitch for Omakub. Most webdev tools are written in JS (or at least used to be). Web browsers run JS just fine. Webdevs, then, should be striving to make sure that their JS-based tooling actually runs in the browser—instead of targeting the non-standard, ever-shiftin…

so how do you automate this?

Re: Omakub – A Developer Setup for Ubuntu

#20
post #19
post #18

> Turn a fresh Ubuntu installation into a fully-configured, beautiful, and modern web development system by running a single command. That’s the one-line pitch for Omakub. Most webdev tools are written in JS (or at least used to be). Web browsers run JS just fine. Webdevs, then, should be striving to make sure that their JS-based tooling actually runs in the browser—instead of targeting the non-standard, ever-shiftin…

so how do you automate this?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN