11–20 of 435 posts
If you operating at large enough scale you can bring the "cloud service" in-house.
> And since nobody is still able to compile things from scratch, everybody just downloads precompiled binaries from random websites. Often without any authentication or signature. Apache has official mirrors that host repo files for various package managers so you can install using apt-get or whatever it is that replaced yum (dnf? dnf): https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/bigtop/bigtop-1.2.1/re... So precompiled bi…
I think the author's point was this: "Unless you compile it yourself, you can't trust it."
> And since nobody is still able to compile things from scratch, everybody just downloads precompiled binaries from random websites. Often without any authentication or signature. Apache has official mirrors that host repo files for various package managers so you can install using apt-get or whatever it is that replaced yum (dnf? dnf): https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/bigtop/bigtop-1.2.1/re... So precompiled bi…
I think the author's point was this: "Unless you compile it yourself, you can't trust it."
> None of these "fancy" tools still builds by a traditional make command. Is there anything more "get-off-my-lawn" than "These tools don't use the thing I like!"
Everyone repeat after me. Makefiles are not scary. I can write a shell script. Do I really need to learn grunt/gulp/webpack/npm/rake/fake/maven/gradle/ant and on and on and on?
Probably somebody has released another one in the time it's taken me to write this comment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the author's point was this: "Unless you compile it yourself, you can't trust it."
How is it more secure? Do you read the entire source code to search for backdoors?
> None of these "fancy" tools still builds by a traditional make command. Is there anything more "get-off-my-lawn" than "These tools don't use the thing I like!"
But I just don't understand why we have to have 47 half-built over-complicated build systems or job runners or whatever the new fad term is for every language, when there's something that does what they all do, is battle-tested, and has been around for decades. Everyone repeat after me. Makefiles are not scary. I can write a shell script. Do I really need to learn grunt/gulp/webpack/npm/rake/fake/maven/gradle/ant and…
Ugh make files. Kill me. Give me a bash script or give me death.
> None of these "fancy" tools still builds by a traditional make command. Is there anything more "get-off-my-lawn" than "These tools don't use the thing I like!"
But I just don't understand why we have to have 47 half-built over-complicated build systems or job runners or whatever the new fad term is for every language, when there's something that does what they all do, is battle-tested, and has been around for decades. Everyone repeat after me. Makefiles are not scary. I can write a shell script. Do I really need to learn grunt/gulp/webpack/npm/rake/fake/maven/gradle/ant and…
I use Rake (or Gulp, or whatever) because then I can use Ruby (or JavaScript, or whatever). Shell plumbing is fine for informal and small-scale stuff, and I make my code conform if somebody down the line (who may be me) wants to get out their duct tape, but the world is more complex than what /bin/sh can see. Shell is the lowest common denominator. Expecting everything to at all times be written in and for that lowest common denominator is not reasonable. We're a tool-using species and we refine tools over time to make them better. The profusion of tools happens because they iterate on each other to be better. If old tools were sufficient, people would use them because learning new ones is hard.
So, yes, you do need to learn those tools. Or invent a shell that isn't tooth-pullingly difficult to use with a JSON file (and do not say `jq`, I love `jq` as an inspector but it does not step to `JSON.parse` and a working subscript operator). Or change `make` so that a git checkout won't trigger a full rebuild. Lots of baseline, stump-simple things that `make` is just not going to do for you because it's built for a frankly outmoded method of development.
> None of these "fancy" tools still builds by a traditional make command. Is there anything more "get-off-my-lawn" than "These tools don't use the thing I like!"
But I just don't understand why we have to have 47 half-built over-complicated build systems or job runners or whatever the new fad term is for every language, when there's something that does what they all do, is battle-tested, and has been around for decades. Everyone repeat after me. Makefiles are not scary. I can write a shell script. Do I really need to learn grunt/gulp/webpack/npm/rake/fake/maven/gradle/ant and…