this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
73 points (94.0% liked)

Linux

48665 readers
519 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DoeJohn@lemmy.world 35 points 2 days ago (2 children)

There is an entire post from the devs on why Bottles is packaged the way it is. [https://usebottles.com/posts/2022-06-07-an-open-letter/]. If you put yourself in the developers' position, it's actually understandable. Distributions ship Bottles package filled with issues or straight up borked, users turn their frustrations to the Bottles developers instead of package maintainers, devs get frustrated and bombarded with issues that they can't fixed. A ton of time, effort and mental health is wasted. I think the wishes of devs should be respected, even though the software is open source and you CAN package it however you'd like.

[–] fl42v@lemmy.ml 38 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Actively resisting packaging is not the way, tho. You can just require an issue to be reproducible with flatpak, and otherwise tell ppl to bother the maintainer.

[–] huskypenguin@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

That's a lot if communication for someone that's working for free.

[–] 0x0@programming.dev 26 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's a disclaimer in the bug submission page.

[–] Rogue@feddit.uk 1 points 2 days ago

Which everyone will ignore.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

require an issue to be reproducible with flatpak,

As a guy who worked in OS security, no fucking way will I be doing that.

[–] fl42v@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago

So, basically, you make software that doesn't work outside flatpak without patches, then start removed about how much those patches suck, then, instead of pretty much saying "we only support flapaks, stop bothering us with distro-related issues" on the issue page, you add even more stuff that needs to be patched out because "sesurity"? Makes perfect sense, ngl.

[–] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't think it's understandable in this case, no.

The entire project depends on Wine, imagine if Wine devs restricted Bottles in what way they are allowed to use it just because Wine project doesn't want to deal with bugs potentially introduced by the Bottles dev.

But they won't, because of the license.
And neither can the Bottles devs.

If they want to have total control over their source code, fine, but then they cannot claim to be open-source and release it under GPL.

[–] DoeJohn@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

just because Wine project doesn’t want to deal with bugs potentially introduced by the Bottles dev.

If you have issue with Bottles, you don't immediately go to the Wine bug tracker. If you have issue with packaged Bottles, you immediately go to the Bottles bug tracker. There is clearly a big difference.

[–] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 13 points 2 days ago

Yes, and another big difference is that Bottles refuses to provide any kind of help to package maintainers.
According to maintainers' comments on the Github project, they have to figure out how to build it by trial and error.

I was actually really surprised that there's isn't any kind of build documentation.
It's pretty unusual.