@enigmatico
Half that shit is for normgroids

@sysrq @enigmatico let's add a third column where it's pike talking and everything listed is plan 9 and after bell labs related appliances

@nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico
https://merveilles.town/@prahou/113533152014836944

@m0xee @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico Fixed.

@Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico @m0xee now its fully fixed

@get @Suiseiseki @enigmatico @m0xee @nyanide @sysrq The person on the right is a faggot. Use software that works

@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @enigmatico @m0xee
Log off normgroid

@sysrq @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @enigmatico @m0xee I'm sorry, but it appears that your message isn't federating properly because you're using a gay OS like Gentoo or Arch. Have you tried being normal and using an OS like Redhat or Ubuntu?

@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico @m0xee you are computationally retarded, if you seriously recommend redhat or übüntü.

@condret @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico @m0xee Why?

@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico @m0xee debian based distros are awful, apt is slow as fuck, packages are outdated, and these distros usually come with a shit ton of bloat that nobody needs.

I've never used redhat and i never will. there once was a guy in radare2, who works at redhat. He left the project in 2019, everything he did was awful, we're still stumbling over shitty code that he committed, that is causing problems today. I won't use a distro from a company who hired this guy.

@condret @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico @m0xee "Oh noes, my repo only has the latest stable version of a program!" Isn't a serious complaint. It's an intentional design by the Debian team for a good reason. And I've had far more issues with Pacman than Apt.

@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico @m0xee it's not just that the packages are outdated, debian maintainers have the hybris to patch packages, because they believer they know better than the devs. then you get shit like this https://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/2008/msg00152.html

or the xscreensaver thing, where debian decided to patch away a warning, that told the user that the installed version of xscreensaver is very old and that they should update

debian shipping outdated packages has proven to be harmful for devs and a security risk for it's users

@condret
> debian maintainers have the hybris to patch packages, because they believer they know better than the devs
And that is a good thing, because software developers often assume that you want new features when you only want security updates. Updating is fine and dandy until things start breaking as a result. Backporting security fixes if good, I wish it was still more common, sadly it isn't anymore.

@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico

@m0xee

and this is why i completly ignore bugreports from debian and ubuntu users. luckily debian-stable stopped packaging r2, but even debian-unstable still does and it's 2 releases behind. That on would be own is ok, if they didn't patch our code. i will not waste my time checking if a bug was caused by a debian maintainer not know what they are doing.


@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico

@condret
That's what you should always be doing, not for Debian, but in general, end users should never report problems upstream, that's what they have their distro's maintainers for — if they decide that it's indeed a problem with software and not their build of it, they report it further upstream 🤷
@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico

@condret
"Hello, I'd like to report a problem: I have this binary that someone else has built for me and it does not work",— WTF is this shit? They won't even be able to tell you how to reproduce the problem even if they tried really hard: they simply don't know what flags the software was built with.
@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico

@m0xee

distros should pack our stuff without modifications, otherwise we cannot ensure the api works as intended

@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico

@condret
> distros should pack our stuff without modifications
No, just no! I probably won't be able to use half of the stuff I use with such an approach: systemd dependency, musl incompatibilities and so on — all of this has to be patched to work well with the distro's base system.
And there is nothing wrong with back-porting security patches — because I don't want those coming bundled with 5 new bugs or incompatibilities.

@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico

@condret
Free software devs are not "licensing out" their stuff — they shouldn't have control over how others use it, nor they should provide support for binaries built with modifications.
End user reports the issue to the package maintainer, who in turn checks if it's a problem with their modifications/configuration or an upstream bug, and acts accordingly — that is how it used to be and I don't see what was wrong with that.

@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico

@condret
Entrusting the upstream developer with security fixes is a horrible idea: you update the package to get a fix for the new exploit only to find out that UI has changed, or config file format — because it was a good idea that happened to coincide with the security fix, and now you have to waste time on fixing your configs — no, thank you! There are exceptions, but in general… Fuck this! It's like building on quicksand.

@Forestofenchantment @get @Suiseiseki @nyanide @sysrq @enigmatico