Ir al contenido principal

Ralsina.Me — El sitio web de Roberto Alsina

Más o menos el 80% de todo lo malo de los usuarios Linux en un comentario

No pue­do res­pon­der ahí por­que:

  • Hay que lo­­­guea­r­­se.

  • No en­­cuen­­tro ado­n­­de pe­­dir una cuen­­ta.

  • Tie­­ne freaking google ads po­­­pups

En­ton­ces res­pon­do acá por­que:

  • Es mi blog y ha­­go lo que se me can­­ta.

Acá es­tá el co­men­ta­rio de huss­am con mi res­pues­ta (que lo ad­mi­to, es un ran­t) en in­glés por­que no pien­so tra­du­cir a otro, a ver si no le ha­go jus­ti­cia a su pa­va­da:

I'­ve been using Ar­ch­Li­nux as my on­ly dis­tri­bu­tio­n/o­pe­ra­ting sys­tem sin­ce ear­ly 2006. It is rea­lly a good dis­tri­bu­tion but la­te­ly the­re ha­ve been a lot of rea­lly bad choi­ces whi­ch I ca­ll bad com­pro­mi­ses:

1. Too many Ar­ch­Li­nux users thi­nk gno­me/k­de are bloat and ins­tead ins­ta­ll so­me half de­ve­lo­ped win­dow ma­na­ger and so­me ter­mi­nal emu­la­tor and ca­ll it a "mi­ni­ma­lis­t" desk­to­p.

Why is that any of your bu­si­ness? And what "com­pro­mi­se" is the­re?

2. Op­tio­nal de­pen­den­cies are the worst idea eve­r. If a pa­cka­ge is li­nked against lib­so­me­thin­g.­so then lib­so­me­thing should be a de­pen­den­cy not an op­tio­nal de­pen­den­c­y. Making lib­so­me­thing an op­tio­nal de­pen­den­cy just be­cau­se "mi­ni­ma­lis­t" users do­n't want to ins­ta­ll de­pen­den­cies is plain stu­pi­d.

Tha­t's not what op­tio­nal de­pen­den­cies are fo­r. For exam­ple, con­si­der the exam­ple I men­tio­ne­d, rs­t2­pdf. It can use py­thon­ma­gi­ck. It can al­so not use it. You wi­ll lo­se one sma­ll fea­tu­re that AFAIK on­ly one per­son ever us­e­d. If you need that fea­tu­re, the ma­nual te­lls you what to do: ins­ta­ll py­thon­ma­gi­ck.

Ma­y­be the­re should be a pa­c­man op­tion "ins­ta­ll op­tde­pen­d­s" whi­ch turns op­tio­nal de­pen­den­cies in­to re­gu­lar ones. That would make you ha­ppy and keep others ha­ppy too.

3. Bad lea­dershi­p. Aa­ron is fan­tas­tic guy but I know at least two Ar­ch­Li­nux de­ve­lo­pers who can do a mu­ch be­tter jo­b.

Tha­t's just stu­pid and mean.

4. Too many Ar­ch­Li­nux users now like bad­ly au­to­ma­tion scrip­ts like yaourt or whate­ver it is ca­lle­d.

Par­se erro­r. And then agai­n: yaourt is grea­t. You do­n't like it? Act as if it does­n't exist and be ha­pp­y. You seem to ha­ve a big pro­blem ig­no­ring peo­ple who di­sa­gree wi­th you. Tha­t's a rea­ll­y, rea­lly se­rious per­so­nal flaw. I su­ggest you grow up.

5. Too many noobs who do dumb things like peo­ple adding their users to ha­l, disk and dbus group­s.

Su­re, they should add the­msel­ves to op­ti­cal and sto­ra­ge. So wha­t? It's a sim­ple pro­blem and it has a sim­ple so­lu­tio­n.

Then agai­n, the addu­ser scrip­ts pro­ba­bly should do that for re­gu­lar user ac­coun­ts. After all, who wan­ts to crea­te a re­gu­lar user that can't use re­mo­va­ble sto­ra­ge? And if said use ca­se exis­ts, that should be doa­ble by re­mo­ving the use­r, and not vi­ce­ver­sa!

On the other han­d, I do­n't gi­ve a dam­n, be­cau­se I can fix it tri­via­ll­y.

The main rea­son why I do­n't thi­nk I wi­ll swi­tch to ano­ther dis­tri­bu­tion soon is that crea­ting Ar­ch­li­nux pa­cka­ges from scra­tch is ve­ry ea­sy and the ini­ts­cript sys­tem is rea­lly fan­tas­ti­c.

All in all, Ar­ch­Li­nux is a rea­lly strong dis­tri­bu­tion now and it's cons­tan­tly gro­win­g.

I ex­pect you, like most eli­tist po­seur­s, wi­ll run away when you feel Ar­ch is too po­pu­lar and ac­ce­s­si­ble to "too many noobs" or so­me si­mi­lar non­sen­se.

Whi­ch, like the ti­tle sa­ys, is why you are a big part of wha­t's wrong wi­th Li­nux user­s.

Hannes / 2009-06-21 10:19:

You are damn right! (it had to be said)
But I have another point, that should be changed: pacman doesn't use an archlinux-gpg-key for checking the packages, like any other package manager does (apt-get, yum, ...).
It's somewhat of a security hole and the devs talked about, but the implementation takes for ever...

Roberto Alsina / 2009-06-21 15:42:

Yes, indeed that is a problem.

susan / 2009-06-21 16:50:

Sorry about the issues with tuxmachines. Yes, I disabled the new account creation because I'd get hundreds of spam accounts and seemingly no real accounts. This is a temporary measure, but my contact information isn't hidden. You could have written.

Same reason for requiring login to comment. Spam comments were overwhelming.

As for the google ad popups, surely you are mistaken. Popups? No. I do have google ads, but I do not have any code for popups.

But I guess since you're so unhappy with my service, I can delete your blog from my list and no longer send any traffic your way.

Roberto Alsina / 2009-06-21 20:18:

I am not unhappy with the service, I just got pissed because people can comment on my posts and I have no way to reply to them.

The popup came from tuxmachines, and was for a game, got blocked by opera, then I authorized it.

As you can see, I have google ads too, so I have no problem whatsoever with that. Just with popups.

I noticed you deleted the post already. Have a nice day.

Roberto Alsina / 2009-06-22 00:46:

BTW: the game was "Evony" (just saw the same ad somewhere else)

Contents © 2000-2024 Roberto Alsina