this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2024
38 points (60.9% liked)

linuxmemes

20453 readers
1907 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 45 points 7 months ago (1 children)

A bit of an elitist gatekeeper, are we?

[–] db2@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's a screenshot of a post by someone that fits that description. The OP here tried to show that but it isn't clear.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 24 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (20 children)

The original post is a perfectly humorous meme on the idea that "maybe enabling users doing things via gui isn't a horrible idea".

Posting a screenshot of someone else's post, with a clearly negative note, in hopes of provoking... What? A hateful echo chamber around it?

There's nothing funny here. It essentially just boils down to "look at how dumb this reasonable opinion exaggerated for comedic effect is" which is little more than toxic slander looking for validation.

[–] TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago

I too consume my memes with a pinky out

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] AlexisFR@jlai.lu 34 points 7 months ago (3 children)

But it's correct. It's time to move on.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] backhdlp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 31 points 7 months ago

Average redditor who didn't grow up to understand that opinions exist:

[–] octesian@lemmy.world 26 points 7 months ago

I don't know whether to upvote or downvote. Congratulations.

[–] BiggestBulb@kbin.run 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

Being real, why DON'T distros just have the ability to do the installation if you double-click whatever file is downloaded?

I feel like we should have either option - download and double-click or just use the command line.

I mean, what else would double-clicking a .tar.gz file or an appimage do than install it (yes, I know, look into the archive, but really - how often is that the desired thing to do)? So, therefore, why don't we just have it install the files that are downloaded?

This is a legit question btw, I really don't know the answer

[–] callyral@pawb.social 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Do you not know what a tar.gz is? it's like a zip file. how are you supposed to install it automatically? the structure inside is unknown.

also, it's commonly used for things like backups.

[–] julianh@lemm.ee 7 points 7 months ago (4 children)

How would the distro tell if the tar.gz is a program or just a bunch of compressed files? I tend to use tar files for compression rather than for distributing or installing software

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] kylostillreigns@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Cause .tar.gz is not an executable binary in itself. It is more like a zip of the binary and its support files. Since it would be really difficult to distribute and maintain native binaries for every type of distro, application publishers used to just distribute for distros that has a larger userbase, like a .deb for Debian/Ubuntu and a .rpm for Fedora/RHEL/Suse, and then they would provide a tarball for any other distro. Flatpak and Snap have been introduced to eliminate this overhead from application developers, but they still offer tarballs as the newer solutions are still far from standardization.

[–] BiggestBulb@kbin.run 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

I 100% get that (and I know it's an archive), but I'm just saying why doesn't double-clicking a .tar.gz just run "tar xf file.tar.gz | sh" on that file? Or check if there's an executable in the extracted files and then run it if there is, and if it's just an archive of files then open the extracted folder?

[–] 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago

What if I don't want to install it, even if there is a binary in there? What if I just wanna open the archive and see it's content?

The OS does the smart thing. The header says it's an archive, so we treat it as just that, an archive. Commercial OSes like Windows and MacOS are the oddballs out, not Linux. It just interprets the cold hard truth - this is an archive, I have no idea what's in it, you tell me what to do with it, end of story.

[–] 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago

I mean, what else would double-clicking a .tar.gz file or an appimage do than install it (yes, I know, look into the archive, but really - how often is that the desired thing to do)?

Personally, I open tarballs quite often. Why? Just wanna know what's inside them.

Double click translating to install on tar.gz is not wise since anything can be packed in a tarball, a gzip archive or a gzipped tarball.

And then you have a similar problem with tar.xz (it's becoming more and more popular from what I can see). It doesn't use gzip to compress the archive, it uses LZMA, so you have to use xz instead of gzip to decompress the tarball.

Basically, it boils down to how UNIX used to work. Mind you, back in the day there were no package managers, it was all done with .tar.zip or make install. This really was hell to be honest... keeping track of what app installed what libraries and versions of it... yes it really was a PITA. This is the real reason why package managers were invented (thank god!) and why having only one package manager on a system is the preferred way to handle apps/software. Otherwise, you'll soon be in dependency hell. Shared libraries are at the core of any UNIX based OS. Yes, Flatpaks/Snaps/AppImages and package managers like nix circumvent this problem, but in no way is the problem gone. It's still there, we just don't mess around with it.

So, basically the idea of having an "installer" came quite late into the game. Plus, having to check on all dependencies and making an install script that worked on every single distro out there was just so complicated, that no one would ever want to go through with it. Sure, there are install.sh scripts in some pacakges out there, but they basically check nothig, it's more or less "copy this here, that there" which of course could be done by hand anyway... and then run the app and pray it has all of the dependencies it needs 😬... which it never does 😂.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] crony@lemmy.cronyakatsuki.xyz 9 points 7 months ago

sudo emerge app-misc/i-love-gentoo

[–] spez@sh.itjust.works 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I personally hate it when software has 'linux support' as one out-of-date .deb file and a .tar.gz

[–] 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

Meeh, if you can compile it or make it run on modern day libraries, who cares 🤷.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] lseif@sopuli.xyz 7 points 7 months ago

10 page wizard, with malware boxed checked by default

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 5 points 7 months ago

Ew, what's that website?

[–] 018118055@sopuli.xyz 4 points 7 months ago

curl pipe bash lol

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Right? Some of us like doing curl | tar xz to download and decompress in a single step, saving time and the hassle of installation

load more comments
view more: next ›