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

Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation

mintlify.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 124 posts

Re: Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation

#61

Post by jedwhite »

petekoomen wrote: post #52

I'm seeing a lot of negativity in the comments. Here's why I think this is actually a Good Idea. Many command line tools rely on something like this for installation: $ curl -fsSL https://bun.com/install | bash This install script is hundreds of lines long and difficult for a human to audit. You can ask a coding agent to do that for you, but you still need to trust that the authors haven't hidden some nefarious instr…

Thanks for posting the original ideas that led to all this. "Runtime for prose" is the new "literate programming" - early days but a pointer to some pretty cool future things, I think.

It's already made a bunch of tasks that used to be time-consuming to automate much easier for me. I'm still learning where it does and doesn't work well. But it's early days.

You can tell something is a genuinely interesting new idea when someone posts about it on X and then:

1. There are multiple launches on HN based on the idea within a week, including this one.

2. It inspires a lot of discussion on X, here and elsewhere - including many polarized and negative takes.

Hats off for starting a (small but pretty interesting) movement.

Re: Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation

#62

Post by blast »

petekoomen wrote: post #60
blast wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the specific application to install scripts? Doesn't your argument apply to software in general? (I have my own answer to this but I'd like to hear yours first!)

It does, and possibly this launch is a little window into the future! Install scripts are a simple example that current generation LLMs are more than capable of executing correctly with a reasonably descriptive prompt. More generally, though, there's something fascinating about the idea that the way you describe a program can _be_ the program that tbh I haven't fully wrapped my head around, but it's not crazy to thin…

That's basically what I was thinking too: installation is a constrained domain with tons of previous examples to train on, so current agents should be pretty good at it.

Re: Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation

#63

Post by 4b11b4 »

petekoomen wrote: post #60
blast wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the specific application to install scripts? Doesn't your argument apply to software in general? (I have my own answer to this but I'd like to hear yours first!)

It does, and possibly this launch is a little window into the future! Install scripts are a simple example that current generation LLMs are more than capable of executing correctly with a reasonably descriptive prompt. More generally, though, there's something fascinating about the idea that the way you describe a program can _be_ the program that tbh I haven't fully wrapped my head around, but it's not crazy to thin…

> "the way you describe a program _can_ be the program"

One follow-up thought I had was... It may actually be... more difficult(?) to go from a program to a great description

Re: Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation

#64

Post by skeptrune »

constantcrying wrote: post #5
dang wrote: post #69

[stub for offtopicness] Since the article has been changed to tone down its provocative opener, which clearly had a kicking-the-anthill effect, I'm moving those original reactions to this subthread.

>Installing software is a task which should be left to AI. This is such an insane statement. Is this satire?

Ok, I've toned that bit down for you!

Re: Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation

#65

Post by skeptrune »

einpoklum wrote: post #2
dang wrote: post #69

[stub for offtopicness] Since the article has been changed to tone down its provocative opener, which clearly had a kicking-the-anthill effect, I'm moving those original reactions to this subthread.

> Installing software is a task which should be left to AI. Just like installing spice racks is a task which which should be left to military engineer corps.

Understood, just toned that bit down.

Re: Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation

#66

Post by johnisgood »

skeptrune wrote: post #13
reddalo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually complain about proposed standards not being under the /.well-known namespace, but in this case, wow. I can't even comment.

better or worse than llms.txt you think?

Worse, because many projects have INSTALL.md which is intended to be read and followed by humans, not LLMs.

(If LLMs can follow it, so be it, but at least humans remain the target audience.)

Re: Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation

#67

Post by dang »

4b11b4 wrote: post #63
petekoomen wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does, and possibly this launch is a little window into the future! Install scripts are a simple example that current generation LLMs are more than capable of executing correctly with a reasonably descriptive prompt. More generally, though, there's something fascinating about the idea that the way you describe a program can _be_ the program that tbh I haven't fully wrapped my head around, but it's not crazy to thin…

> "the way you describe a program _can_ be the program" One follow-up thought I had was... It may actually be... more difficult(?) to go from a program to a great description

That's a chance to plump for Peter Naur's classic "Programming as Theory Building"!

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

What Naur meant by "theory" was the mental model of the original programmers who understood why they wrote it that way. He argued the real program was is theory, not the code. The translation of the theory into code is lossy: you can't reconstruct the former from the latter. Naur said that this explains why software teams don't do as well when they lose access to the original programmers, because they were the only ones with the theory.

If we take "a great description" to mean a writeup of the thinking behind the program, i.e. the theory, then your comment is in keeping with Naur: you can go one way (theory to code) but not the other (code to theory).

The big question is whether/how LLMs might change this equation.

Re: Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation

#70

Post by dddrh »

Hey I had a similar idea around skipping the “brew/bun install” copy+paste on a site and instead just give a short prompt to have the LLM do the work.

I like the notion of having install.md be the thing that is referenced in Prompt to Install on the web.

Edit: forgot my link https://dontoisme.github.io/ai/developer-tools/ux/2025/12/27...

Post reply on HN