Didn’t expect to ever see this thing again. Search engines literally reroute you to child protection services if you look for it.

I think it’s slowly getting better though, more people are finally listening. At least that’s what I notice; still, those purists who don’t give a proper shit (“The CLI is perfectly accessible! It’s all text, where’s the problem?”) and believe everyone got to be a developer or filtered out are really loud and annoying.

Of course the system should inherently be accessible. Better backwards compatibility would just make a lot of things simpler, even if what’s being made simpler is to deal with bad decisions and exclusion. Enabling people (everyone, not just abled or developers) is always good.

Running 20 year old binaries is not the primary use case and it is very manageable if you actually want to do that. I’ve been amazed at some completely ancient programs that I’ve been able to run, but I don’t see any reason a 20 year old binary should “just work”, that kind of support is a bit silly. Instead maybe we should encourage abandonware to not be abandonware? If you’re not going to support your project, and that project is important to people, provide the source. I don’t blame the Linux developers for that kind of thing at all.

I see your point. What I think though is that it’s particularly hard on Linux to fix programs, especially if you are not a developer (which is always the perspective I try to see things from). Most notable architectural difference here between f.e. Windows and Linux would be how you’re able to simply throw a library into the same folder as the executable on Windows for it to use it (an action every common user can do and fully understand). On Linux you hypothetically can work with LD_PRELOAD, but (assuming someone already wrote a tutorial and points to the file for you to grab) even that already requires more knowledge about some system concepts.

Of course software not becoming abandonware would be best, but that’s not really something we can expect to happen. Even if Europe would make the absolutely banger move and enforce open-sourcing upon abandonment of software after a few years, it would still require a developer to fix issues. The architecture of the OS should be set up so it’s as easy as possible to make something run, using concepts (like file management) as many people as possible are familiar with.

devs are often being discouraged from compiling tools in a way that makes them work forever (since that makes the app bigger and potentially consume more memory) This is simply not true.

We might be in different bubbles in this case. Please be aware I’m talking about the very loud toxic minority (hopefully it’s a minority…) who constantly shit about how things aren’t following “KISS” close enough, that your app or distro is bloated, etc. It feels like if I was collecting all statements against Flatpak, systemd, even just static linking that boil down to “it’s bloated! It’s not KISS! Bad!” (so not well-reasoned criticism) I read or hear, including around my local hackspace or on events, I could fill whole books.

Linux desktop isn’t actively working against disabled people, don’t be obtuse.

Not actively, no. The issue here is rather that, for way too long, we didn’t care enough. We had things working comparatively nicely one or two decades ago, but in more recent history the support deteriorated to such a degree the Linux desktop has become, to a huge degree, inaccessible to blind people (mostly due to issues with Wayland). I didn’t save those blogposts or statements to show in discussions like these, but the takeaway from all of them is that “It used to work for me many years ago, but if I want a system that respects me today I’m forced to use Mac”. But of course you’re also right, it’s slowly getting better! (Correct me if I’m wrong, not a native speaker: “being alienated” doesn’t inherently imply malicious intent of doing so, does it?)

But this idea that “finally we have people that want Linux to work” is infuriating. Do you have any idea how much of an uphill battle it has been to just get WiFi working on Linux? That isn’t because the volunteer community is lazy and doesn’t want things to work: that’s because literally every company is hostile to the open source community to the point of sometimes deliberately changing things just to screw us over. The entitlement in that statement is truly infuriating.

Sorry, I was really pissed off yesterday evening by earlier comments in the chain implying it’s good to “filter out people” and got carried away. This one is completely on me.

Running 20 year old binaries is not the primary use case and it is very manageable if you actually want to do that. I’ve been amazed at some completely ancient programs that I’ve been able to run, but I don’t see any reason a 20 year old binary should “just work”, that kind of support is a bit silly. Instead maybe we should encourage abandonware to not be abandonware? If you’re not going to support your project, and that project is important to people, provide the source. I don’t blame the Linux developers for that kind of thing at all.

I see your point. What I think though is that it’s particularly hard on Linux to fix programs, especially if you are not a developer (which is always the perspective I try to see things from). Most notable architectural difference here between f.e. Windows and Linux would be how you’re able to simply throw a library into the same folder as the executable on Windows for it to use it (an action every common user can do and fully understand). On Linux you hypothetically can work with LD_PRELOAD, but (assuming someone already wrote a tutorial and points to the file for you to grab) even that already requires more knowledge about some system concepts.

Of course software not becoming abandonware would be best, but that’s not really something we can expect to happen. Even if Europe would make the absolutely banger move and enforce open-sourcing upon abandonment of software after a few years, it would still require a developer to fix issues. The architecture of the OS should be set up so it’s as easy as possible to make something run, using concepts (like file management) as many people as possible are familiar with.

devs are often being discouraged from compiling tools in a way that makes them work forever (since that makes the app bigger and potentially consume more memory)

This is simply not true.

Android is Linux!

That’s a rabbit hole of semantics I’m not going down. 😅 I think it’s clear we are talking about Desktop Linux, which is very different to Android.

What was the last completely unmaintained binary that you pulled on Windows and ran (with no tweaking) and the last one that failed on Linux?

Ouff, didn’t use Windows (10) for years. Probably either Photoshop CS6 or one of my old favs like Total Annihilation (1998). On Linux the last app that failed also happened to be a (native) game, Life is Strange: Before the Storm. I saw someone fixed it with a glibc shim, and a friend likes that game.

Why do you keep sharing that link instead of this one?

Because I’m complaining about puritans and Linux-bros who keep sugarcoating real problems that exist for a long time now, or even still make a fuss about things like systemd or Flatpak (which solve a lot of long lasting issues). That blogpost is a perfect example of this. I said it in my first comment, “Puritans on Linux are a real menace”. Everything after that is merely me putting my finger into open wounds (which are being worked on by devs and I’m absolutely celebrating that, please don’t get me wrong!) which are regularly being sugarcoated by those people.

Have you considered joining the community and working with it – like the author of the blog that you keep sharing – instead of trying to insult every one who works on it and calling it a disgrace?

It wasn’t my intention to insult any dev working in these issues, if it sounds like that I’m genuinely sorry. I’m mad about puritans who behave as if Desktop Linux is a silver bullet for long-term app support or people like Semperservus who think it’s a good thing non-devs (and those who simply don’t have time to invest that time into their computer) are being “filtered out”. And if someone sugarcoats big issues like how Linux systems historically handled packages and dependencies and the problems it causes I’ll use strong words to make abundantly clear how wrong they are, because I’m fed up by this willful ignorance.

(Same willful ignorance in my opinion is the reason why accessibility deteriorated to the current degree since we once had that part figured out. That’s why I used is as argument)

What the hell is going on in this thread? Linux has been being actively developed by people who want “shit to god damn work” forever.

Yes and no. Yes as in “you can fix it” (if you’re a programmer), but no in terms of “everything is set up so binaries will still run in 20 years as-is”. Dependency hell, missing library versions, binaries being linked against old glibc versions you can’t provide… all of these are known issues, and devs are often being discouraged from compiling tools in a way that makes them work forever (since that makes the app bigger and potentially consume more memory). And better don’t tell someone who’s blind (and used Linux before) what’s quoted above, they’ll either laugh at you or get really angry. It’s also one of the reasons I’m angry (I’m able to see, but I hate this hypocrisy in the community). Linux on desktop utterly alienated disabled people, simply because stuff like screenreaders keep breaking.

And that fight against closed-source and anti-consumer shit is awesome, but that changes absolutely nothing about Linux being completely awful in terms of long-term support. Running old software is a whole project (for enthusiasts) in itself almost every single time, meanwhile I can run almost any decade-old software on systems like Android or Windows simply by installing it without having to be an IT professional.

that literally nobody including little timmy who’s 14 and just submitted his first PHP patch has a problem with."

Except that this causes usability issues for the 99.99% of users who aren’t that little Timmy you just made up, and it causes accessibility tools which are freaking essential for many people to simply break. Old games becoming unplayable isn’t an issue only because of their Windows versions and Wine, dxvk etc - we literally have to fall back to Windows software to keep software running because of how badly the Linux system architecture works for desktop usage. What a disgrace.

if we had the right to repair their software we wouldn’t have this problem in the first place because someone else would have already fixed it.

Literally has nothing to do with Linux’ own problems.

This might be the most awful Linuxbro take I’ve read this year, congratulations. Linux has to lack a stable ABI to keep the capitalists away and make apps constantly require maintenance to filter out bad behaviour? Just wow.

I really hope for way more people to come over so nonsense like this finally stops.

Fortunately we do have a steady influx of new people incl. those who demand shit to god damn work, finally shifting this notion.

For the time being we still have to resort to using the Windows version and Wine for old software though… But I already had the situation where the (unmaintained but working) app also had a Flatpak which was last updated many years ago and it just worked, which made me incredibly happy and hopeful. ❤️

Good thing there’s a battle-proven response if people don’t like this because it’s “not what Linux is supposed to be” or some other nonsense: If you don’t like it just fork it yourself. 😚

This shit is the exact reason Linux doesn’t just have ridiculously bad backwards compatibility but has also alienated literally everyone who isn’t a developer, and why the most stable ABI on Linux is god damn Win32 through Wine. Hell, for the same reason fundamentally important things like accessibility tools keep breaking, something where the only correct answer to is this blogpost. FOSS is awesome and all, but not if it demands from you to become a developer and continuesly invest hundreds of hours just so things won’t break. We should be able to habe both, free software AND good compatibility.

What you describe is in no way a strength, it’s Linux’ core problem. Something we have to overcome ASAP.

Puritans on Linux are a real menace. Every time someone calls an OS install image of 3-4gb “bloated” I want to scream uncontrollably. Not statically linking stuff is part of this cultural issue.

Flatpak might solves these issues in the long run. Of course the same people therefore hate it, because it’s “bloated” and “convoluted”.

<rant> How dare we have different versions of the same lib! Where will we end up, like MS Windows? Where I can boot up apps as old as myself? Outrageous! Not my precious mibibytes!). </rant>

In the long run it more often than not is better to show them how to help themselves though. Let’s say they use Mint and want to install something they saw from ElementaryOS, so a new Flatpak repo: Of course in this moment I’d be done faster with their request for help sending them two commands to just paste, but showing them where they can add the new repo themselves and how this will make all the new apps pop up in their Software Store doesn’t just make them more independent and reassure them in trying things themselves, but will make it less likely for them to constantly ask you for help again.

And it makes more people stick with Linux, that’s always good.

That’s just wrong, the correct commands are always different. E.g. for journalctl to keep following the newest entries you need -f, while in dmesg you need -w for the very same feature. That’s not any more “the same” than it is the “same” to move your mouse around a differently organized GUI.

Writing in the CLI is comparable with moving the mouse, and remembering the appropriate commands of the specific tool comparable to know where to click on. However a proper GUI is immediately visible to be interacted with (and not abstract like most CLI arguments) and will convey function through form, while the function in the CLI is hidden behind help texts and man pages.

I do like working with the CLI a lot, but what you said was simply wrong.

But then the CLI wouldn’t be faster anymore and the whole argument most people keep bringing up falls apart.

Also those man pages aren’t even remotely written to be understandable by Linux novices most of the time…

Also, CLI is consistent across any distro…

This falsehood crashed so many devices and left so many beginners with error messages it isn’t even funny anymore.

I know what you mean, just beware: in lots of cases it’s not as universal (as in distro-independent) as some still think it is.

For people who want to get things done with their PC that isn’t inherently IT-related (like, doing office work or music production or anything else) and just need to do the occasional light sysadmin thing like setting up new drives to be auto-mounted somewhere, pointing to GUI tools is just so much better. And in many cases it is also safer (making your system fail on boot with a small typo in the fstab is painfully easy).

Dropping an extensive explanation and how-to is a meme.

Additionally it can screw up sometimes. There are known issues with it with OpenSuse, causing either defective repo settings (the detection of the physical media gets mangled) or even unbootable systems. I think this can also happen on some other distros, given Ventoy’s uncommon bootchain.

Given the unexplained blobs as well at least OpenSuse recommends not to use Ventoy.

I thought of Lunduke, but mental outlaw also went down the drain.

Your word in the Linux communities’ hardliners ears. The consistent rejection of isolation concepts seen in Flatpak or Snap by some people go completely beyond me.