211–220 of 221 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AnduinOS has more than just cosmetic changes, though. It removes Canonical's controversial Snap packaging format and its supporting tools. It replaces it with Flatpak and the GNOME Software app store configured to show only Flatpak apps. AnduinOS uses native .deb packages throughout, including for Mozilla Firefox; it comes with no Flatpaks installed at all. Sounds like a big win for those of us frustrated by Snap.…
VanillaOS?
I really wish people creating a distro, and even more so distro of a distro of a distro should not call it OS. (Debian - Ubuntu . AnduinOS) I am alwasy happy to look at new operating system projects. It is a major hobby. Could distros use AnduinDI AnduinUbuntu AnduinLinux. or just Anduin I dont like getting my hopes up like that.
> Could distros use AnduinDI AnduinUbuntu AnduinLinux. or just Anduin ANAL, but I'm reasonably sure that the answer is no, they could not, because Ubuntu and Linux have trademark policies that would prevent that. Also, I disagree; a distro, even a respin, is an operating system, they just don't have a unique kernel which sounds like what you want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Central repositories and package managers are the reason I avoid Linux - I like to keep offline backups of old software. This is extremely difficult on Linux and you have to trust the package managers to keep your software available. I do not trust them to do so, and have faced countless issues at work with package deprecation on industrial Linux boxes. I end up having to manually search for and archive a million DEB…
If you are so worried by that you can setup a private repository. It's just a glorified HTTP server...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GNU people would insist so. But Linus Torvalds doesn't use that name and he seems indifferent to the whole GNU thing. The kernel was actually named Linux after Linus by early users and it kind of stuck. The license came later. And the Linux Foundation, the thing that is now probably closest to "owning" Linux (aside from Linus Torvalds) just calls it the "Linux kernel". There is no actual distribution called GNU/Linux…
it's a copypasta
Earlier quoted context omitted.
After a few years using nix for my projects, everything else feels flimsy. They can make the logo be a pile of poo for all I care. Maybe you're the one who is sidetracked with politics.
Cool, glad it works for you, as I said, it is promising. Others might be turned off before they get started. In any case, it's a distraction, and has no business in any open source project. Inviting politics in (if that is what the Nix team is doing) puts an upper bound on the distro's reach. I got curious about it, and yeah, doesn't appear a great community, at least a year ago: https://shealevy.com/blog/2024/05/08/…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh. I'm sure there's some projects that release exclusively via docker or snap/flatpak, but in my experience that's pretty uncommon. Far more often I see a release page with a dozen or more options. Binaries for Arm, AMD64, flatpak, snap, a few flavors of Mac, dockerfile, and of course the venerable tarball. The advanced will have deb and rpm as well. I see these options as very much aligning with the spirit of free…
It's becoming more and more common in my experience, hence the long post. Ubuntu's notorious hiding snaps in apt by writing wrappers and making it hard to work around it is the next level of this trend - and it is deplorable. That type of obfuscation and attempted deception is not the spirit of open source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this. The software is free. But calling it "free software" is a mistake? And I don't understand the advocacy angle. Is any reference to "free" or "open" in any tech-related conversation automatically advocacy (even if the author did not intend to be an advocate for it)? Genuinely curious. Apologies if it doesn't read like genuine curiosity, I am genuinely curious.
There are specific philosophies and missions behind various kinds of software for which you might have access to the source code. The most formalized and principled original one, was unfortunately named "free software". (Where RMS expects to be able to explain that it doesn't mean "you don't have to pay money for it" like everyone already thought, but he wants it to actually means "free as in freedom". And he imagine…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yet, other than the Netbooks glory days, I am yet to buy a Laptop, even from Linux shops, where everything is 100% supported, or eventually doesn't get broken in some kernel update. Purism’s laptops appear to be well-supported and to hold up well over time. System76’s too.
Where can I buy them in Europe, without ordering online? Additionally, how many posts from online forums do you want with counter-examples from them?
https://frame.work/es/en/linux
EDIT: I hadn't seen the "without ordering online"
You just check what models/chipsets are supported when you are in the shops
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> yet when one of my devices breaks down, I can get a replacement on the same day, How many times has it happened in your life? Anyone who uses a computer professionally has a backup ready at all time anyway. These days it is not like it is hard to find a computer with its baseline compatible with linux anyway. An incompatible network chip issue is easily solved with a know USB compatible wifi card. Usually only peop…
I use computers since 1986, UNIX in various flavours since 1992, GNU/Linux since 1995 starting with Slackware 2.0 (kernel 1.0.9, first ELF support), and to this day that is the usual answer in Linux forums. Yet, other than the Netbooks glory days, I am yet to buy a Laptop, even from Linux shops, where everything is 100% supported, or eventually doesn't get broken in some kernel update. I rather use the Linux kernel i…
You don't expect MacOS to work on an ACER laptop you buy at the nearest Mediamarkt right? Nor do you expect to be able to plug a windows installer memory stick and install it on an apple silicon macbook air right ?
With only a couple minutes of research it is fairly trivial to find laptops compatible with linux, especially if you stick to business line of laptops such as the thinkpads, dell latitude. I could install and use Fedora on the last 3 professional laptops I have been given by my employers, as in all personal computers I have bought.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's neat enough, but I still prefer to not have to download stuff, and instead have the available software in a central repository. There's a reason why projects like Homebrew exist for Mac.
Central repositories and package managers are the reason I avoid Linux - I like to keep offline backups of old software. This is extremely difficult on Linux and you have to trust the package managers to keep your software available. I do not trust them to do so, and have faced countless issues at work with package deprecation on industrial Linux boxes. I end up having to manually search for and archive a million DEB…