Has modern Linux lost its way?

[mardybear]

Interesting read...glad it's not just me.
Part 1:
http://changelog.complete.org/archives/ ... -on-jessie
Part 2:
http://changelog.complete.org/archives/ ... simplicity

[andre@home]

You're not obliged tu use bigger Linux distros, you may use tiny, small ones.
The kernel is liely similar, but the rest is much smaller.
An overview:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightweigh ... stribution

https://www.google.nl/webhp?sourceid=ch ... tributions
https://www.google.nl/webhp?sourceid=ch ... tributions

Yes.. some things will change... even for ever... I remember in my youth a man bringing the black coals for the heating.... when I now look around ~50 yrs later... that profession has disappeared completely in Western Europe...
And in the beginning there was quite some hesitation to change to gas....as it had a bad reputation (old gas had another composition, dangerous)....
Now most people do not want to go back to the coals... the dust, the danger, uncomfortable.... maybe that holds also for parts that change within Linux... maybe we later say... "why did we still work with it in 2015, knowing that is was dangerous... but hesitating to change...."

So interesting to keep on questioning do we really have to change.... the answer may be ... no ... or yes... or maybe somewhat later but not now.... but ultimately we will change.....

You still could go back to very simple DOS versions from the 80-ies if you want....

[thanatos_incarnate]

Hmm...

1. Mounting works here, so it's not a universal problem.

2. It's a testing release. These things happened even back in Squeeze with no
systemd anywhere.

Not sure what to make of that article. It sounds like systemd conspiracy theory,
but not directly so. And yeah, software gets more complex and then obviously
the bugload is much higher, but my experience is that all stable releases I've
seen, and I've been here since Sarge, have improved in quality over the years.
I remember atrocious bugs in Sarge's Gnome 2 of a similar nature that I think even
Ubuntu wouldn't ship with now.

My point: Judge Debian when it's ready. And no, Debian probably is not, nor do
I think it has been for a long time the sort of distro that is geared towards a lean
experience, but I think you can make it pretty lean by adding a nice WM, a small
file manager, let udev handle the mounting via rules and just the fstab, etc.

[andre@home]

Look to MS .... money enough.. so you could make a good OS...
Windows 2000 a releave after crashy Win95, but quite limited in option; its stbility... for that perid... excellent
let's forget Win Me edition...
But XP was excellent for that time, much more optiopns than Win 2000
Urgghhh Vista.... how can you make such a slow ugly product
Win7 ... feels good.. quite stable, interesting tools.. (like the snipping tool and excellent hardware recognition)
Win8... still many computers are PC/laptops... so do not force a tablet system on that.... so we can skip that version...

So you even a lot of money is no guarantee for a good OS...

And let's not talk about the change from menu to ribbons.... and the incompatibility issues eg for macros from Excel 2003 to 2010...
Horoble... .a new version should be better ... not worse...
Yes .. you can make very fast a graphics with the new Excel... but then you need quite some time to put everything the axis... in 2003.. the wizard a relief.. fill out and ready as you like...

[RawMustard]

Has modern Linux lost its way?

Not really. It's more an attack of the gnome Nazis that gives that impression. I leaned long ago, more than 10 years that these control freaks were going to make life hell for everyone. For years now I've been running the same set up with ease which spares me from being sabo'd by their bullshit. A light window manager (I use fluxbox) and a little bit of extra work to set it all up just right and all is well. I have all my config files set up just the way I want everything and have rolled them up into an archive I can just extract over a new install and I'm done!. The only thing giving me grief now is that damn virusD they've come up with, and debian now pulling in untold, stupid dependencies for no reason. But there is some push back happening, which is great. Hopefully we can leave them to their filth and follow our own path for the future? Devaun is looking better by the day!

[schnuller]

Interesting read...glad it's not just me.
Part 1:
http://changelog.complete.org/archives/ ... -on-jessie
Part 2:
http://changelog.complete.org/archives/ ... simplicity

As far it is me "modern" linux has lost it's way, but there are still conservative solutions around (the question is: for how long?). I didn't care much for Linux, but i did care for Debian. That has lost it's way (or found a new one, depending how you look at it).

To me it is similar like running Windows: It works, somehow, but i got no idea how. If there are problems, they might have all kind of reasons. There don't seem to be clear indicators anymore: If x happens, then probably something like y is the solution.
That, expirience to run Linux being similar to experiencing to run Windows, offers options. To run pretty much any OS with the software i like, don't care for the OS anymore, and do what i consider fun (that is: something unrelated to computing).

"Linux is subversive". Give me that feeling back, and i am back in. I can't see an OS which offers that.

btw: For me it does work. That is not the point.

[schnuller]

but my experience is that all stable releases I've
seen, and I've been here since Sarge, have improved in quality over the years.

My experience is that it has improved with Lenny, and a lot, and then it went down (starting with funspace ...)

My point: Judge Debian when it's ready. And no, Debian probably is not, nor do
I think it has been for a long time the sort of distro that is geared towards a lean
experience, but I think you can make it pretty lean by adding a nice WM, a small
file manager, let udev handle the mounting via rules and just the fstab, etc.

Dunno bout being ready or not, i ran Sid all the time and don't care much for little problems.
I strongly doubt that there are many distros more lean than Debian, and i would like to hear examples. Back then gnome or kde started with 300 MB of RAM and installing them during installation, via tasksel, took 3.5 GB of harddisk space (or less). Not that much people would have done it like that ... I ran Debian on all kind of machines, many Pentium 3 or 4's, and the smallest one coming with 64 MB of RAM. Lean enough, as far it's me.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

I strongly doubt that there are many distros more lean than Debian, and i would like to hear examples.

TinyCore!
SliTaz!


Anyway, don't you run Gentoo now?

That was pretty damn lean last time I installed it...

@OP: I can't stand automounting anyway -- I like my system to only mount what I tell it to when I tell it to how I tell it to.

I did a full GNOME jessie install a few weeks ago and that would mount the crap out of anything that came within six feet of the USB ports so I don't know what the author of that piece is talking about (clickbait, maybe?).

[schnuller]

TinyCore, Slitaz: Sure. Such distros. But they are ... well ... i guess your smiley said it already.

Yes, i run Gentoo. It seems lean to me, but not more lean than Debian. Dependency handling is - obviously - more lean.

+1 for automounting, or rather the lack of it. What a nonsense. I do know when i want to mount something, no need for the environment to do it for me.

[aicardi]

I like my system to only mount what I tell it to when I tell it to how I tell it to.

+1

[edbarx]

I like my system to only mount what I tell it to when I tell it to how I tell it to.

+1

No, No, No! A system that takes care of itself without the users' direction is what is needed in this day and age. Systems that need too much interventions from users are past their age.



I was joking... there are still people who expect their computers to be set up the way they want.

[Moonshine]

I did a full GNOME jessie install a few weeks ago and that would mount the crap out of anything that came within six feet of the USB ports so I don't know what the author of that piece is talking about (clickbait, maybe?).

I think the author's not using systemd, and the point of his article is "why do I have to have problems if I make a choice to not use systemd". Can't really comment on that (I use systemd and like it, have no such problems).

[mardybear]

I don't read the OP linked article as being related to systemd in particular, more just a reflection of modern Linux in general. Strange that systemd keeps coming up in the thread comments though. The author touches on a variety of Linux related issues, example below:

From the original linked article:
systemd may help with some of this, and may hurt with some of it; but I see the problem more of an attitude of desktop environments to add features fast without really thinking of the implications. There is something to be said for slower progress if the result is higher quality.

This image represents modern Linux sound, since the introduction of pulseaudio - not complicated at all hey? FWIW, sound worked quite well for most old Linux users back in the Alsa-only days.



For those who are not aware, the same programming team has now provided the Linux community with the simplicity of systemd - just because it works, doesn't mean it's necessarily a good thing

I'm saving my allowance for a systemd poster, which will get pinned beside Farrah Fawcett and the original Star Trek Enterprise. Starting to feel old beyond my years

[JLloyd13]

The same programming team famous for Poettering, who openly advocates breaking compatibility with other *nixs, then calls the community "a$$holes" when they object and then blames Torvalds for the communities 'state'

I'm not a fan of either pulseaudio or systemd in principle, in fact I've never been able to tell the difference as an end user. Currently I'm using both on my desktop and don't want to mess with it since I like it and dont want to screw it up, and pulseaudio on my chromebook (needed to connect to the Chrome OS sound system though my chroot, I believe Chrome OS uses upstart for init). If for whatever reason I have to reinstall on my desktop I'll probably try and avoid both though, but for now I'm happy with my setup.

I don't think the modern Linux as a whole has lost its way, but I think certain projects (cough*gnome*cough) need to reevaluate their priorities and put portability and Unix ideals higher.

[thanatos_incarnate]

I don't find anything bad in desktop complexity should one need it.
Not all people like automation, but most do. Glad to have that option in Linux.
Modern systems are expected to run a lot of things. That someone might be
content with just a WM and a working xterm is cool, but ultimately this might
not be what most would consider a working system.

Pulseaudio is an easy way for desktop users to have a modern sound system
that just works. It has its quirks, yes, but it's more automated than Jack and
ALSA cannot do real duplex with many hardware setups.
For instance, I have to tell ALSA manually that my HDMI output is obviously
not my default soundcard.

I also fail to see how this complexity and desktop integration is anything recent in Linux.
Desktop complexity used to be even worse some 10 years ago. Remember when Gnome
used esd and KDE had artsd? Well, now most of them just use ALSA or Pulse.