Neko the gameri hate that it's very often like this
DJDarrenAs someone who’s never used Linux, TIL that software doesn’t work across all flavours of Linux.
now you know 😫
ichbinjasokreativWindows kind of has that too, with all the .MSI, .exe, .msix and all the appxpackages and how almost none of that works out of the box anymore because you’d otherwise be able to install another browser without opening edge once
I’m a Mac user, so they made it as simple as possible for our simple brains. That said, no old 32bit Steam games for me ☹️
last time I used Mac, I still need to go online and grab the dmg file myself, since most app is not avaliable in the app store, like jetbrains app and adobe apps.
Is it still the case?
Yeah, that’s most often the case. I very rarely install from the App Store unless the software I’m after has a link on their site.
Yeah, Valve sucks with the “we’re not rewriting this for 64 bit because there’s no benefit” stance. It’s a pain in the ass to use on Linux because you have to have the 32 bit counterpart of everything it uses alongside the 64 bit counterpart that literally everything else uses. You would think they would finally decide to rewrite it since they’re a major Linux contributor, and their handheld runs Linux.
Fortunately, using a neat tool called Whisky, I’m able to install the Windows Steam client, from which I can download and play the Portal games, because they’re proper. But that’s M1/2 only.
Since you mentioned you’ve never used Linux, you may find it amusing that similar windows compatibility software exists for Linux and is called Wine. Whisky and Wine.
Whisky is just a Wine wrapper. It’s still Wine under the hood.
Yeah, Wine is a thing on Mac too. Never really dug too far into it though. Whisky is easy to use though.
Nice, a lot of the games work out of the box with the Linux client, you just need to enable support for unsupported games for Proton on the Steam settings.
The software itself should run, but the installers themselves use different standards. I’m pretty sure you could set up your own distro to use installers from different one, though it may require some work.
Well it does technically, the issue we’re talking about is how it’s packaged, one you extract the package the software will work just the same (assuming there aren’t any version mismatches between kernel modules). DEBs (Debian based distros) and RPMs (RedHat based distros) are the two biggest package formats, the next common format is a tar ball.
Add to this, this gives birth to more modern packaging format like flatpak, appimage, and snap, that works across all distro with proper permission control.
Now for most graphical apps, you just search on the app store and click install, like a mac user.
xigoiDon’t mention the S-word here, some people might come out of their basement to tell you how it’s the worst thing since proprietary software.
kaduIt’s so funny that Linux enthusiasts spent over a decade mocking Windows for “having duplicate dependencies” and “DLLs wasting space” only to now go crazy over Flatpaks.
Congratulations, you’ve discovered macOS .img and Windows .msi distribution strategies.
I think you are talking about two group of Linux user. I think majority of the user realized that shared dependency is not scalable in the recent couple years, yet there are still a loud minority that still oppose dupilicated dependencies.
Finally, I think the three universal package formats provide better sandboxing support than msi. But appx in windows are very much inlin with these packaging formats.
Microsoft’s new package format is doesn’t require sandboxing, but it is an option at least now.
uisshared dependency is not scalable
Explain yourself.
a loud minority
Kernel develipers, libraries developers, compiler developers, distro maintainers, mirrors hosters, anyone whose system runs not on few terabytes disk and gigabit internet.
I heard some geniuses put entire graphical drivers into snap/flatpak/appimages.
Correct me if I am wrong.
Different app depends on different version of the underlying softwares. In the old days distro packages, however it would cause dependency hell.
Hence with the development in containers, universal packaging format prevails, where each app is packaged with all of its dependencies. so that the system dont need to maintain the dependency of every single app people want to use.
Different app depends on different version of the underlying softwares.
On different ranges of versions. Usually something like “1.2 or newer”. With few exceptions that break ABI every year(looking at you, Boost) or 11 times a month(it is rust, who would have guessed). If everything was as hard as you described, then there is no way for me to play UT2004 back from, you guessed it, 2004. But I did, and all I needed just to install few 32-bit version of libraries and run it with OSS(very old audio api) emulation.
however it would cause dependency hell.
No, task of package manager is to solve dependency hell
universal packaging format
We had 2 universal packaging formats, now we have 5 universal packaging formats and two container types.
where each app is packaged with all of its dependencies.
Which in case of UT2004 means packaged with all exploits back from 2004.
like a iphone user.
I DON’T WANT THIS
Iphone is most locked-down anti-consumer pile of garbage and this is how you defend it?
There are different aspect to the same product. IPhone is lockeddown and aniconsumer, but it doesn’t mean every aspect of it is not worth taking a lesson from.
In order for linux to have mass apeal, it will need to be simple by default, and that is where the app store model shines, you just search and click install, everyone can figure that out.
But that doesn’t imply linux has to be lockdown and anticonsumer like iphone. If you want to compile your own kernel, you should have freedom to do so.
and that is where the app store model shines, you just search and click install, everyone can figure that out.
This is how linux works for last 30 years…
Except now you dont need to worry about outdated version even on a super stable distro.
You get proper permission control and a mispackaged app cannot break the entire system.
How did this come up in discussion?
How did this come up in discussion?
Because permission control is what most people expect on phone application, which is another way linux has great default UX that is similar to what happens on phones.
Finally, I don’t think a mispackaged app is supposed to be able to break out of the application sandbox, unless some bug is exploited.
Unless you are referring to the fact that some app are packaged with overly-permissive default permissions. But most people can change the default permission, and only grant permissions that makes sense.
Finally, I don’t think a mispackaged app is supposed to be able to break out of the application sandbox, unless some bug is exploited.
At least one of mentioned formats(AppImage) is regular executable. There is no need to break out of sandboxing when maintainer didn’t put it in sandbox in the first place.
Anyway, mainline distros have selinux or apparmor profiles. Sanboxing exists outside of three yet another “universal” package formats.
But most people can change the default permission, and only grant permissions that makes sense.
You mean people who package or end users?
I mean user can manage permissions to override the default, like apps on other platforms.
Basically how it is and was before mega-binaries.