Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again

Le 12-02-2025, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> a écrit :

On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 08:51:59 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>

I'm not sure why they bothered making Flatpaks and Snaps when AppImages
work pretty much everywhere.

>
I don’t understand the point of any of them.

You should have made all your possible to avoid any explanation. Or you
are so stupid you never understood the given explanations. I don't know
which one.

There are a lot of reasons. From the distros, like Ubuntu, who needs at
the same time to release a stable version every two years and to provide
Firefox which has no real version number and must be updated frequently.

From the developer who doesn't want to spend more time to provide a way
to install his program than to program it.

From the sysadmin who want the installed softwares not to mess with the
system. And if python has good points, it's version management is the
worse I ever saw. So it doesn't mean nothing.

I'm not saying snap is a good answer, but the reasons behind it are
real. And being unable to see that tells more about you than about the
tools you refuse to understand.

They seem like attempts to
retrofit something that looks like MSI (only slightly better designed)
onto the Linux ecosystem.

Maybe things changed since I looked at that the last time. But, the last
time I checked the msi provided only a way to install easily a new
software on Windows. And sometimes with something to remove them. There
was nothing about the updates.

Why?

I gave you only three reasons. There are others, but if you refuse to
understand, you won't find them.

Clearly it is to woo the proprietary
software developers -- the ones who don’t want to release their source
code to let the distro maintainers worry about packaging.

In which world are you living? Are you stuck in an older past than
LP/DG/NV/whatever? You want punch cards too? Nobody want to install
something from source anymore. There is no reason to force people to
install from source anymore.

If a developer offers his software for everyone he has to provide a way
to install a working binary with it. And your dream world doesn't apply
in this case because the distros won't package it if it's not already
well spread. And guess what, to be well spread it needs a simple way to
be installed by everyone. So either the developer provides a package for
every distro or he is using something that can be install in any distro.

So, back to the beginning, the purpose is just to answer the issues you
refuse to see.

The downside is that each SnapImage/FlatApp/whatever has to carry around
all its dependencies with it,

On a modern system, it's not an issue anymore. In the mid 90's, where you
look stuck, the system took most of the place of the hard drive. So yes,
back then it was a real concern. But now, almost nobody needs more than 20Go
for a full Linux distro, which is invisible on a modern hard drive.

instead of being able to share dependencies through the package system.

Yes, speak about that with the python community. Even the first class
moron FR/LP/DG/whatever who refuses to do anything with python had five
different versions of it installed on his system.

Now, on some systems, like ubuntu, python is managed by the system, so it
refuses to execute a "pip install". And if the library isn't provided by
ubuntu, you have to run "pip install" in a virtual environment to be
able to use a library designed not to be shared with the libraries of
the system.

And python is only one programming language, with rust, it's far from
better. And then, a lot of things can be considered, like is it xorg or
wayland? Is it systemd? Is it gnome/kde/else? Sometimes, you don't care
about the init system or the graphical interface, other times, it's
mandatory to take care of them.

A modern program using modern libraries who would follow your advice
to provide only the source code will never been installed. It would be
too difficult for the really interested user. And once the program is
installed, it wouldn't be sure to run anymore once the system is
upgraded. And to update the software would be as cumbersome as to
install it. No, really, no end user wants the developers to follow your
advice to provide only the source code.

It's not the 90's anymore, the systems are more complex and varied.

The idea that developers, particularly
proprietary developers, can do a better job of keeping these dependencies
up to date than the distro maintainers (whose job it is to do just that),
just seems laughable.

The fact that you don't know what a modern distro looks like is telling.

I strongly believe you never programmed or you did it a very long time
ago. Because with this sentence you show you know nothing about complex
development. It's a fact that the programmer knows better than the
distro maintainers about the versions of the libraries required by his
program to be able to run. Doubting it is just refusing the reality. And
the distro maintainers are well aware of it: that's why a lot of things
are done in this way. Look at nixos and guix: the all distros are based on
the concept that makes you laugh because they know better than listening
to you old and impracticable advice.

But I understand why you laugh: it's easier to despise what you don't
understand than to try to improve your knowledge.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io