131–140 of 145 posts
I find it curious that a distro espousing simplicity would choose XOrg over Wayland (which was created to resolve problems arising from unnecessary complexity in XOrg). It looks like this is 80% simplicity and 20% sentimentality. I don't use wayland myself, but simplicity is certainly not a factor in that decision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wish there was a good standard alternative to bash (sh in this case) for shell programming. I would say Tcl! Tcl is one of the most underrated programming language that everybody probably has installed. It has existed for as long as ksh and even long before bash. It is simple and powerful enough that first version of Redis were written in it[1]. MacPorts is written in Tcl (including its ports DSL) and I enjoyed e…
Agreed 100% with this. TCL is a super cool language IMO. It's mature, unixy, and has minimal external dependencies. The ecosystem is stable and slow moving. I would encourage anybody to try it out! The syntax takes some adjustment because it's not lval/rval-based, which is maybe why it's not so widely used now. But if you want a language that's more robust than shell and more minimal than Python, consider TCL for you…
> Explicitly excludes the following software: wayland I find it curious that a distro espousing simplicity would choose XOrg over Wayland (which was created to resolve problems arising from unnecessary complexity in XOrg). It looks like this is 80% simplicity and 20% sentimentality. I don't use wayland myself, but simplicity is certainly not a factor in that decision.
> Explicitly excludes the following software: wayland I find it curious that a distro espousing simplicity would choose XOrg over Wayland (which was created to resolve problems arising from unnecessary complexity in XOrg). It looks like this is 80% simplicity and 20% sentimentality. I don't use wayland myself, but simplicity is certainly not a factor in that decision.
Wayland strikes me as the "shiny new thing" that is not ready for widescale use. If I was designing a distro and could only choose one I would choose X unless it was specifically a distro for shiny things that break.
> Explicitly excludes the following software: wayland I find it curious that a distro espousing simplicity would choose XOrg over Wayland (which was created to resolve problems arising from unnecessary complexity in XOrg). It looks like this is 80% simplicity and 20% sentimentality. I don't use wayland myself, but simplicity is certainly not a factor in that decision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I saw that after posting. It's not a critic of Dylan's work, more a critic of how difficult it is to write good bash code. Your comment on shellcheck and Dylan expertise just confirm it. It's like C, you could write safe C but it's very difficult. I wish there was a language with the ubiquity of Bash but modern and safe.
»I wish there was a language with the ubiquity of Bash but modern and safe« I agree. But reaching such a point would be hard. Not impossible, but hard. I think the main problem would be to gain traction for an alternative. Because if one questions the status quo, then there are tons of alternative paths to go by. But which of them are viable…? It’s not easy to pick a winner in this kind of situtation. And most people…
https://github.com/oilshell/oil
A new Unix shell. Our upgrade path from bash to a better language.
It runs thousands of lines of existing shell scripts unmodified, but there's also a brand new language that will be familiar to Python or JS programmers. See http://www.oilshell.org/blog/2020/01/simplest-explanation.ht...
It works and you can try it now. The downside is that the implementation is more like a slow prototype, but that's being addressed, and the release I made today has stats about the C++ version (blog post forthcoming).
> Uses a package manager written in less than 1000 lines of POSIX sh (excluding blank lines and comments). Enough to get 20 bugs :-). I wish there was a good standard alternative to bash (sh in this case) for shell programming. Otherwise I like the spirit, it's a good match with collapse os ;-)
For quite some time I've been using https://github.com/tarruda/python-ush on personal scripts and it is working very well. If you like python, I recommend giving it a try :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. That was true for a time, and i enjoyed it coming from NetBSD. But nowadays, if for any reason you don't want to use systemd, or have different opinions about partioning, e.g. limiting access and execution rights and usage for /var, /tmp you are in for an eternal uphill battle against the decisions of 'upstream' and therefore the 'community' which devoutly adheres to these. There are some derivatives addr…
> [...] have different opinions about partioning, e.g. limiting access and execution rights and usage for /var, /tmp you are in for an eternal uphill battle against the decisions of 'upstream' and therefore the 'community' which devoutly adheres to these. There are some derivatives addressing that I'm curious about which use cases wasn't supported for you, why it was an uphill battle and which derivative addressed th…
One derivative would be https://web.obarun.org , another one https://artixlinux.org
> Explicitly excludes the following software: wayland I find it curious that a distro espousing simplicity would choose XOrg over Wayland (which was created to resolve problems arising from unnecessary complexity in XOrg). It looks like this is 80% simplicity and 20% sentimentality. I don't use wayland myself, but simplicity is certainly not a factor in that decision.
Is the total system complexity less with Wayland? It seems to push a lot of functionality out to the edges. X isn't really all that complicated, just crufty...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The more systemd free alternatives, the better.
Curious, what alternative do you use and why? I'm just trying to understand the dislike for systemd