https://www.change.org/p/canonical-ltd-have-red-hat-and-canonical-collaborate-on-one-universal-linux-package-system
I agree.
All package systems except for APT must be abolished and banned.
>>55131238
No, fuck you. How will I feel superior over other people if this succeeds?
>>55131266
>not using a source-based package system
KYS
>>55131238
I wouldn't want it. Snappy is fucking cancerous and so is all of RH's package systems ever.
APT is glorious.
>>55131311
>it's better to do things manually
>automated tasks are for retards
>wasting 48h setting your system is the normal thing to do
>Having to read a fucking wiki for every single program as there is no auto-config tools because it's for le noobuntu user
>>55131289
You can still build from source.
>>55131238
Dnf and Pacman are way better than apt. Even Zypper is better than shitty apt
>>55131767
>implying gentoo package installs aren't completely automated including dependency resolution
>implying I have to read the wiki for every package when there's tools to do that for me
>implying those 48 hours are primarily spent on actual setup and not simple compilation, much of which can be skipped with the binary flag
>>55131767
t. literal inbred
snibeti naps master race reporting in
>>55132055
plus it's more like under-two-hours of compilation instead if one has a non-shitty CPU
This is what it says:
Right now Linux distributions have very good shared-libraries package management systems, and there has been a lot of activity recently around the idea of complementing those with a universal bundled-libraries package management system. Such a system would work equally well on all Linux distributions, be "double-click" easy for users, and easy for developers to package for.
Already about a dozen such systems exist, but the two with the most weight behind them are snaps, developed by Canonical, and flatpaks, developed by Red Hat.
http://snapcraft.io/
http://flatpak.org/
Unfortunately, a standard is only valuable insofar as it is *actually a standard*. https://xkcd.com/927/
Neither flatpaks nor snaps will actually make things easier for developers or users unless one of them is the single standard. Otherwise they will each just be one more system to keep track of and learn.
There has been some vitriol from both sides over the other side being dishonest, stealing their thunder, being uncooperative, etc. Both Canonical and Red Hat seem to be painting themselves as spearheading a broad development effort when in reality both companies (arguably one more than the other but I won't take sides) are working pretty much by themselves on their respective systems.
>>55132923
Moreover, there have been accusations that Canonical/Red Hat is trying to grab control over the Linux application ecosystem and lock people into being dependent on their respective companies. At the very least, the fact that both technologies are so tightly tied to one organization is genuinely worrying.
I believe both Red Hat and Canonical are great, honest organizations full of good people who just want to help Linux and make the platform better. I don't think either of them is *trying* to be anticompetitive - they just haven't done a good job of getting other organizations involved with their projects. I also think it's a shame that there seems to be so much mutual distrust between them.
So, with this petition I would like to ask Canonical and Red Hat to work through their disagreements, talk to each other, and decide on ONE standard system for bundled-libraries Linux applications.
>>55132936
The Proposal
1: Employees from Red Hat and Canonical who are working on flatpaks and snaps all meet face to face with each other one or more times, either IRL or through videoconferencing software.
2: Talk to each other, be nice, resolve the distrust, and realize that ultimately we are all Linux users, freedom appreciators, and we all want FOSS to succeed.
3: Discuss the technical details and challenges facing these systems, what plans both organizations currently have, and the advantages and disadvantages of flatpaks and snaps.
4: Decide on ONE SINGLE file format and ONE SINGLE technology to be the universal "bundled-libraries packaging system" for all Linux distributions.
5: Henceforth, Red Hat and Canonical cooperate together on that one single technology (yes, this means snap, flatpak, or both will be abandoned).
I don't care if they choose snap, flatpak, one of the dozen other ones, or decide to build a new one from scratch. I don't care if they decide to merge the code from both together somehow. I don't care if they decide to pick one but only on the condition of adding features from the other one. I don't care if they use one of the existing names or come up with a new name for it. I just want an actual standard and not myopic, anticompetitive BS.
More links:
https://www.happyassassin.net/2016/06/16/on-snappy-and-flatpak-business-as-usual-in-the-canonical-propaganda-department/
https://lwn.net/Articles/691496/
http://www.valdyas.org/fading/index.cgi/2016/06/17#flatsnapimages
I've got $10 that says they pull some bullshit like npm.
>>55132154
Bullshit there's only one functioning snappy package and that's a fucking 1gb download of libreoffice.
>>55135160
i don't see it when i run "snap find", but i do get 85 other results
>>55131238
It really would be great to have some way to just click and run linux programs.
This is probably one of the bigger stumbling blocks of the OS.
>>55137377
like what ? having a .deb file and double clicking on it would just install the software ?
>>55137433
Well yes, but having a cross distro version of this would be nice.
>>55137433
This happens already doesn't it?
>>55135160
stop lying
>>55137565
>>55137639
Dunno if it already exist, but I'm coding it right now.
I don't see the need on this one. Each distro being it's own entity with it's own values and operation is a good thing. I'd only accept this standard if it was apt. If someone wants to target all distros that is what the linux standard base and a tarball with some source to compile is for.
It is nice of you to try and make an effort to make the Linux desktop better (or what you percieve as better) but that is harmful. 2 competing standard proposals are not "fragmentation madness".
xkcd comics are funny but they're not meant to enunciate dogmas.
>>55132923
>Neither flatpaks nor snaps will actually make things easier for developers or users unless one of them is the single standard.
This statement is wrong.
It would still be much easier with 2 packages than with the current system.
>>55137662
This is what's wrong with millennial code monkeys
Everybody point and laugh
Finally, Linux invents .msi
>aptfags crawl out of the woodwork
pacman or sudo kys
UBUNTU WON
JUST FUCKING DEAL WITH IT FAGGOTS
RED HAT WILL NEVER ADMIT DEFEAT
RED HAT WILL SIT ON TOP OF THEIR BILLIONS MADE FROM SPYING ON USERS PAID TO THEM BY THE NSA (LOOK IT UP IF YOU THINK I'M MAKING THIS SHIT UP)
YOU FAGGOTS WILL NEVER LEARN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>55137814
You remind me the thread of yesterday where some anon made a music player. There's a lot of music players, of course he won't match the quality of some of them, but he made this for fun because he likes programming.
Why someone shouldn't program something if he likes programming ?
And actually what this anon is doing doesn't really exist. There's ubuntu that provides a GUI installer, but ther other distributions don't.
I agree that we have to prune some distros, but competition is good.
Let Rehat and Canonical do keep doing their thing.
Do we really need Fedora and CentOS? Can't we just make a more stable server-oriented disk image of Fedora instead of CentOS? Instead of having a whole new distro, just have it point at a different package repository, designed for server work, and call it the CentOS repo.
Do we really need Mint? Mint is buggy as hell, and they didn't really contribute anything besides a new DE. Just keep using Ubuntu and improve their Cinnamon DE instead.
Ubuntu should just be a more frequently updated Debian. And Ubuntu should just put all the DEs into the same disk image instead of having Xubuntu, Lubuntu and other crap.
Arch is a niche. I don't know much about Gentoo, but I see it as a meme version of Arch.
Fragmentation means that Linux will never be taken seriously as a consumer OS.
>>55138206
>Fragmentation means that Linux will never be taken seriously as a consumer OS.
That's false.
People don't give a shit about fragmentation. Seriously they don't care. They'll just see it as "oh so I got choice, nice".
If you want linux to be a consumer OS, the unique thing you have to change :
Start selling laptops with linux pre installed instead of windows
or at least give the choice when the user buy to use windows or linux
And start doing ads and marketing for linux in general.
People don't even know its existence. And the few that does, think it's for tech savvy people.
Those are the main problems of linux.
>>55138261
You don't understand. Fragmentation means more choices. Choice is paralyzing. Too many choices and mainstream consumers will just fall back to OSX or Windows. You don't want to scare them with too many choices.
Source: took classes on technology marketing.
>>55138261
>Those are the main problems of linux.
Lol, you're retarded. Windows isn't popular just because it comes preinstalled with shit.
The fragmentation does look retarded, and confuses people. You can see this evidence in forum posts confused as to why .deb doesn't work in archlinux or some other shit.
It's not having more than one distro, that can be ignored, it's the absolute lack of any kind of standards. Every distro has it's own retarded way of doing something extremely simple, like installing a fucking program. There's no standards. Having a single portable app container would be fantastic.
>>55138297
Which is why you don't leave them a choice and just pay companies to sell their prebuilts and laptops with gnu/linux on them. Almost no one is gonna reinstall their OS anyway, at least no by themselves and even then probably by paying to get it done.
>>55138326
Yeah and then you end up with situations like "girl can't go to college because ubuntu, fug"
Don't believe me?
https://youtu.be/5Qj8p-PEwbI
>>55138367
Except you don't because no one is using MS standards anymore because no one is using MS Office anymore because no one is using MS Windows anymore because it's getting BTFO from computers since no preinstalls.
>>55131238
The simplest argument against fragmentation is all the redundant duplication of effort that goes into maintaining each fork.
Think of all the manpower wasted.
>>55138297
>>55138311
why is windows popular then ? if it's not because it comes pre installed on every computers and that people are used to this OS since they were born because they'll never experience another OS (schools and most companies use windows) at the point they'll never hear about linux ?
Why is this piece of shit so popular ? Why do you think microsoft spend millions of bucks on advertising, paying the governments to use their OS on schools, creating tools for students, giving some of them for free, etc.
There's no such thing as Linux fragmentation. Linux is a kernel, people can make whatever OS they want out of it.
>>55138393
Everyone should just use Microsoft WIndows. Anything else is a waste of dev time.
just take in ass to stop fragmentation
2015
year of linux desktop
.tar.gz is a perfectly fine packaging system.
Besides, this won't just magically make all packages work on all systems. There is more different between Red Hat based linuxes and Ubuntu/Debian based linuxes than a packaging format.
Learn to package software yourself and you'll never have a problem.
>>55138367
girl couldn't go to college because of her own stupidity, not linux.
If you got an OS you can't use, you go replace it with one you can use. hurrrrrrrrrrr
>>55131238
>Change your business model because I don't understand it
Red Hat focuses on the enterprise market, canonical does not.
So which package manager is /g/ approved and why? I come across apt mostly so that's what I've been using butI see a lot of apt bashing here.
Can't you just ship binaries? I've seen this work before it seems to be possible.
>Someone codes something he wants
>hurr fragmentation
>>55131238
Yay. Confiicting duplicate libraries.
Thanks, Uboma.
Dynamic linking was supposed to fix fragmentation by making applications use whatever the OS used. Instead it just increased fragmentation by making applications dependent on specific versions of specific distros
>>55144377
Go SysWoW64
