We love to praise linux constantly and tell everyone to change to it (they should) but what are your biggest annoyances ?

Mine would be, installing software (made even more complex by flatpaks being added, among the 5 other ways there already were to install software) and probably wifi power management issues.

  • Laser@feddit.orgEnglish
    3·
    3 days ago

    I think one could argue this but it’s immaterial. My point remains the same. The lack of a universal installation method makes deployment expensive on Linux, and confusing for users.

    If you’re fine with an executable just writing stuff to your system, then .sh is Linux’ universal installer format.

    It’s true there are degrees of backwards compatibility here, but Windows is king

    I agree, Microsoft has invested a lot into backwards compatibility and some nifty tricks to deal with DLL hell which was a huge issue in the past and as a result, provide the best backwards compatibility, as long as you stay on x86-64. Nowadays, each .exe basically sees its own sets of dlls in the filesystem. I agree it’s best there. My point was rather that it’s not as bad on Linux as people make it out to be if the application was packaged correctly. Going forward, I think stuff like Valve’s Linux Runtime can provide compatibility.

    • JasSmith@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      3·
      3 days ago

      If you’re fine with an executable just writing stuff to your system, then .sh is Linux’ universal installer format.

      I would be, but it’s not enforced. Few developers use it. Any method needs to have almost total universal adoption. Then libraries get built around that standard instead of the other way around.

      My point was rather that it’s not as bad on Linux as people make it out to be if the application was packaged correctly. Going forward, I think stuff like Valve’s Linux Runtime can provide compatibility.

      That’s fair. It’s getting better. Linus Torvalds agrees with you. Valve might have to save us from this fragmentation.