Linux lacks the software.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 12:19:21 -0500, Newyana2 wrote:
Linux lacks the software.
Linux is the only platform that offers a full native suite for both ARM
and x86 (both 32-bit and 64-bit). No other platform can match that.
Microsoft has been spending millions trying to get Windows to work
properly on ARM, but it still can’t manage it. Microsoft has also been spending millions trying to make Windows more like Linux -- and it can’t manage that either.
You don’t hear of Linus Torvalds lying awake at nights, trying to figure out how to add drive letters to Linux, do you?
winget comes to mind.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:Damn, is there a linux store where you just click on a program to
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
install it? I must have missed that.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 12:19:21 -0500, Newyana2 wrote:
Linux lacks the software.
Linux is the only platform that offers a full native suite for both ARM
and x86 (both 32-bit and 64-bit). No other platform can match that. Microsoft has been spending millions trying to get Windows to work
properly on ARM, but it still can’t manage it. Microsoft has also been spending millions trying to make Windows more like Linux -- and it can’t manage that either.
You don’t hear of Linus Torvalds lying awake at nights, trying to figure out how to add drive letters to Linux, do you?
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Damn, is there a linux store where you just click on a program to
install it? I must have missed that.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:24:35 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
wrote in <vk2kh2$34hvq$5@dont-email.me>:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:Damn, is there a linux store where you just click on a program to
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
install it? I must have missed that.
Most common distributions have some sort of software manager.
Here's is Linux Mint's:
https://imgur.com/EgkWlC7
Another graphical package manager is Synaptic.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Damn, is there a linux store where you just click on a program to
install it? I must have missed that.
On Thu, 12/19/2024 10:19 PM, vallor wrote:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:24:35 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
wrote in <vk2kh2$34hvq$5@dont-email.me>:
Most common distributions have some sort of software manager.
Here's is Linux Mint's:
https://imgur.com/EgkWlC7
Another graphical package manager is Synaptic.
Linux has several generations of presentation of software.
* Software-Store-like presentation (the latest method)
* GUI presentation of package manager text (the practical way)
* Textual command line search (what came before the GUI, still useful)
(The Snap Search was truncated, to not embarrass the people who made it).
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/q7J4NWMW/Ubuntu-Selecting-Software.gif
No special care was used in selecting the test subject for that picture.
It was whatever was available in the VM list.
For the Software Store, I provide two frames. The timestamp of starting
to install a software. And the timestamp when the effort is "finished".
A total of 12 minutes, when the .deb version would install in a minute, tops.
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/pTsVcCNT/Ubuntu-2404-App-Store-GIMP-Test.gif
What I did in preparation for that shot, is
snap refresh
This downloads recent copies of the Gnome Desktop snap, which is huge.
If you don't do that, the App Store does an implicit "refresh" while
you are sitting there with egg on your face. You could easily sit
there for half an hour, until the "refresh" is finished. The App Store
does not say "sorry, doing a refresh". There is no status in the GUI indicating the level of contempt involved.
I separated that part out, so the App Store would not look so bad.
I did the "refresh", before doing the timing run.
Result:
1) App Store takes 12 minutes to download a package that is 10x
the size of the .deb version.
2) Once the SNAP is loaded (a self-contained execution environment),
the environment has failed to form a symbolic link from some weirdly
named shared library, into the appropriate spot. Attempts to launch
the erstwhile GIMP program, fail.
This is why anyone who really uses the OS, uses Synaptic and .deb files, something that Linux Mint has too and LM has a better look about it
as it does not feature SNAPS. You can still install the snap subsystem
if you want, but you don't have to. Firefox is a .deb in Linux Mint.
For now at least.
Le 2024-12-19 … 20:13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Saying that the Windows Store is trying to copy Linux is actually
ridiculous since Apple was the first to produce one.
Le 2024-12-19 … 21:24, Hank Rogers a ‚critÿ:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Damn, is there a linux store where you just click on a program to
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
install it? I must have missed that.
The "stores" most Linux distributions offer have that now.
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 08:33:53 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
Le 2024-12-19 … 20:13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Saying that the Windows Store is trying to copy Linux is actually
ridiculous since Apple was the first to produce one.
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in about 1994.
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 08:41:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
Le 2024-12-19 … 21:24, Hank Rogers a ‚critÿ:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Damn, is there a linux store where you just click on a program to
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
install it? I must have missed that.
The "stores" most Linux distributions offer have that now.
Or just use a GUI front end to the package management system.
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 08:33:53 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
Le 2024-12-19 … 20:13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Saying that the Windows Store is trying to copy Linux is actually
ridiculous since Apple was the first to produce one.
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in about 1994.
Le 2024-12-20 … 15:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 08:33:53 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
Le 2024-12-19 … 20:13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Saying that the Windows Store is trying to copy Linux is actually
ridiculous since Apple was the first to produce one.
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in
about
1994.
That's not a store.
On 12/20/24 3:42 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in
about 1994.
Wasn't that derived from SMIT, which was originated in IBM's AIX circa
1989?
The Synaptic GUI for example, is the GUI for a single repository filled
with .deb files.
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 16:25:06 -0500, Paul wrote:
The Synaptic GUI for example, is the GUI for a single repository filled
with .deb files.
Isn’t it a front end for whatever is in /etc/apt/sources.list and /etc/ apt/sources.list.d/*? Which can be any number of repositories?
Le 2024-12-20 … 15:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 08:33:53 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
Le 2024-12-19 … 20:13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Saying that the Windows Store is trying to copy Linux is actually
ridiculous since Apple was the first to produce one.
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in about >> 1994.
That's not a store.
Paul wrote:
On Fri, 12/20/2024 7:35 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:what's wrong with your address
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 16:25:06 -0500, Paul wrote:
The Synaptic GUI for example, is the GUI for a single repository filled >>>> with .deb files.
Isn’t it a front end for whatever is in /etc/apt/sources.list and /etc/ >>> apt/sources.list.d/*? Which can be any number of repositories?
It probably can. But all it was originally designed
for was .debÿ as that's all there was at the time.
The Software Stores are of more recent manufacture,
and are an invention of a richer era, so they have
to support more options out of the box. But generally
speaking, in terms of operating speed, and communication
style, they can be slower, and they don't exactly
give you much in the way of hints, on a failure.
Clicking the "Open" and nothing happens, that's
not very nice. At least with a command line launch
after installation, there are error messages.
While I occasionally test the Software Store, I have
zero interest in using it on a daily basis. That would
be an awful way to live. Synaptic by comparison, is a
trustworthy item. I can get thing done with that.
And the lineup is hardly ever wrong. Very good curation
by the staff. You will notice in my random selection
of the GIMP image editor (SNAP version) from the
Software Store thing, not only was it slow, but the
program was broken. I can promise you the .deb version
(like on Linux Mint), won't be broken. That's because
the first level of checking is by Debian staff.
ÿÿÿ Paul
On Fri, 12/20/2024 7:35 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 16:25:06 -0500, Paul wrote:It probably can. But all it was originally designed for was .deb as
The Synaptic GUI for example, is the GUI for a single repository
filled with .deb files.
Isn’t it a front end for whatever is in /etc/apt/sources.list and /etc/
apt/sources.list.d/*? Which can be any number of repositories?
that's all there was at the time.
WHAT THE FUCK HAS THIS GOT TO DO WITH WINDOWS?
On Fri, 12/20/2024 4:45 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
Le 2024-12-20 … 15:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 08:33:53 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
Le 2024-12-19 … 20:13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Saying that the Windows Store is trying to copy Linux is actually
ridiculous since Apple was the first to produce one.
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in about >>> 1994.
That's not a store.
The "Store Concept" is the dumbed down version of package management.
The user is not supposed to understand or learn anything about
packages and dependencies, when pecking at the button in the Store.
Doing a dumb version, is fine, if you can pull it off.
If, every time you click the button, a biscuit comes out,
then the user would "trust" the dumb method. If, like in
my demo test, the biscuit is not delivered and there
is no error message or even a hint of failure, the
dumb concept is a fail, because the customer is not
getting a "reward" for clicking the button. The
operant conditioning is going to be a fail.
All this arguing about who invented the Store, it is
the Psychology department at my university that invented it.
At the entrance to the department, was a receptionist.
Next to the receptionist was a stack of chicken cages
with one chicken per cage. There are buttons to click,
and some sort of stimulus. The chicken figures out,
that if you click the "GIMP" button, a grain of food
will come down the chute. If the chicken is not
rewarded when the "GIMP" button is pressed, the
chicken has no incentive to click it the next time.
I often wondered who did "maintenance" on the chickens,
because they were in excellent condition, none of them
seemed to be diseased or anything. But everything the
psych department did was like that. They would do the
most complicated things, to suit their religion
(B.F. Skinner-ism). They had probably conditioned
a grad student, to take care of the chickens
(you know, give the grad student electric shocks,
if the work was not done).
<snip>
I often wondered who did "maintenance" on the chickens, because they were in excellent condition, none of them seemed to be diseased or anything. But everything the psych department did was like that. They would do the most complicated things, to suit their religion (B.F. Skinner-ism). They had probably conditioned a grad student, to take care of the chickens (you know, give the grad student electric shocks, if the work was not done).
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in
about
1994.
That's not a store.
Well, it is a single tool in which you can search for and install any application.
In 2024, why would it be necessary for a user to know that GIMP didn't install because 13 obscure libraries couldn't be pulled from their respective repositories? Why do Linux losers insist that everyone live in the Stone Age?
Le 2024-12-20 … 20:57, Paul a ‚critÿ:
On Fri, 12/20/2024 4:45 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
Le 2024-12-20 … 15:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 08:33:53 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
Le 2024-12-19 … 20:13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a ‚critÿ:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 20:04:50 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
winget comes to mind.
Winget, Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... Windows Store?
Did I miss any?
Saying that the Windows Store is trying to copy Linux is actually
ridiculous since Apple was the first to produce one.
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in
about
1994.
That's not a store.
The "Store Concept" is the dumbed down version of package management.
Clearly. However, you don't buy applications in Synaptic.
The user is not supposed to understand or learn anything about
packages and dependencies, when pecking at the button in the Store.
Doing a dumb version, is fine, if you can pull it off.
If, every time you click the button, a biscuit comes out,
then the user would "trust" the dumb method. If, like in
my demo test, the biscuit is not delivered and there
is no error message or even a hint of failure, the
dumb concept is a fail, because the customer is not
getting a "reward" for clicking the button. The
operant conditioning is going to be a fail.
All this arguing about who invented the Store, it is
the Psychology department at my university that invented it.
At the entrance to the department, was a receptionist.
Next to the receptionist was a stack of chicken cages
with one chicken per cage. There are buttons to click,
and some sort of stimulus. The chicken figures out,
that if you click the "GIMP" button, a grain of food
will come down the chute. If the chicken is not
rewarded when the "GIMP" button is pressed, the
chicken has no incentive to click it the next time.
I often wondered who did "maintenance" on the chickens,
because they were in excellent condition, none of them
seemed to be diseased or anything. But everything the
psych department did was like that. They would do the
most complicated things, to suit their religion
(B.F. Skinner-ism). They had probably conditioned
a grad student, to take care of the chickens
(you know, give the grad student electric shocks,
if the work was not done).
In 2024, why would it be necessary for a user to know that GIMP didn't install because 13 obscure libraries couldn't be pulled from their respective repositories? Why do Linux losers insist that everyone live
in the Stone Age?
On 12/20/2024 5:44 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in
about
1994.
That's not a store.
Well, it is a single tool in which you can search for and install any
application.
ÿ More to the point, it's a catalogue of ready-to-go programs...
A catalogue that's necessary only because in all these years
of disparate Linux versions, thery've never cooperated enough
to just come up with an analog to the Windows software
installer.
ÿ Windows installers come in many forms, but almost without
exception they include all necessary files and are made to support
various Windows systems and versions with little more than a
double-click required to make them work. What the package
managers do is not "search for and install any application".
They
list a limited list of programs that your particular Linux version
can install. And typically the names of those programs tell you
nothing about what the program does.
ÿ The irony here is that just yesterday you were telling me that I
screwed up by installing a program that wasn't listed in the
Suse package manager because you believe those are the only
programs that one should use.
ÿÿ What you miss is that your attitude is actually one of the classic, typical reactions of Linux fanatics: Any possible problem on Linux
must be due to user error because it's not possible to have a legit
criticism of your religion. That pigheadedness culture is a big
part of why Linux is still a broken mess after 30 years of Desktop development. (Which is not a criticism of Linux per se, but rather
of Linux as a desktop version. The people producing it simply don't
get the point of a personal computer.)
On 12/20/2024 5:44 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in about >>>> 1994.
That's not a store.
Well, it is a single tool in which you can search for and install any application.
ÿ More to the point, it's a catalogue of ready-to-go programs...
A catalogue that's necessary only because in all these years
of disparate Linux versions, thery've never cooperated enough
to just come up with an analog to the Windows software
installer.
ÿ Windows installers come in many forms, but almost without
exception they include all necessary files and are made to support
various Windows systems and versions with little more than a
double-click required to make them work. What the package
managers do is not "search for and install any application". They
list a limited list of programs that your particular Linux version
can install. And typically the names of those programs tell you
nothing about what the program does.
ÿ The irony here is that just yesterday you were telling me that I
screwed up by installing a program that wasn't listed in the
Suse package manager because you believe those are the only
programs that one should use.
ÿÿ What you miss is that your attitude is actually one of the classic, typical reactions of Linux fanatics: Any possible problem on Linux
must be due to user error because it's not possible to have a legit
criticism of your religion. That pigheadedness culture is a big
part of why Linux is still a broken mess after 30 years of Desktop development. (Which is not a criticism of Linux per se, but rather
of Linux as a desktop version. The people producing it simply don't
get the point of a personal computer.)
In 2024, why would it be necessary for a user to know that GIMP didn't
install because 13 obscure libraries couldn't be pulled from their
respective repositories? Why do Linux losers insist that everyone live
in the Stone Age?
As compared to DLL hell?
On Sat, 12/21/2024 7:21 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
In 2024, why would it be necessary for a user to know that GIMP didn't install because 13 obscure libraries couldn't be pulled from their respective repositories? Why do Linux losers insist that everyone live in the Stone Age?
Ah, but they weren't "pulled from Repositories".
This was the SNAP version of GIMP. A squashfs container filled with
every library needed to make GIMP run.
Nothing at all comes from the system /usr/lib when the GIMP SNAP runs.
It cannot in fact. Even if the GIMP inside the container
needed a hug, it can't get a hug from the life forms outside
the container. It's environment is completely inside the container.
The SnapCrafters (the party placing the GIMP in the SNAP Store),
they are the ones for ensuring the alignment of elements inside
the file system of the container.
By attempting to run the busted GIMP from the command line,
we can see on the first invocation, a number of errors. There
is some process that happens after the container is loopback
mounted, where some of those errors are resolved.
But it seems one of the dependencies, it exists inside the
file system. But the symbolic link, to link it into a path
where the GIMP executable can get it, is missing.
This is the value of looking at the symptoms. We can see
the situation is non-recoverable. If I reach inside the
squashfs and "fix it", that will change the checksum of the
file, the file will be discarded, and a fresh copy of the
diseased SNAP will be fetched.
*******
I later discovered that Ubuntu does have a dual representation
for the GIMP. This is how I got myself a working setup. I removed
the SNAP and installed a .deb . Fixed.
sudo snap remove gimp
sudo apt install gimp
gimp example.heic
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/RFGmQnP9/gimp-deb-ubuntu2404-HEIC.gif
On 12/20/2024 5:44 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Linux pioneered integrated systemwide package management starting in
about
1994.
That's not a store.
Well, it is a single tool in which you can search for and install any
application.
ÿ More to the point, it's a catalogue of ready-to-go programs...
A catalogue that's necessary only because in all these years
of disparate Linux versions, thery've never cooperated enough
to just come up with an analog to the Windows software
installer.
ÿ Windows installers come in many forms, but almost without
exception they include all necessary files and are made to support
various Windows systems and versions with little more than a
double-click required to make them work. What the package
managers do is not "search for and install any application". They
list a limited list of programs that your particular Linux version
can install. And typically the names of those programs tell you
nothing about what the program does.
ÿ The irony here is that just yesterday you were telling me that I
screwed up by installing a program that wasn't listed in the
Suse package manager because you believe those are the only
programs that one should use.
ÿÿ What you miss is that your attitude is actually one of the classic, typical reactions of Linux fanatics: Any possible problem on Linux
must be due to user error because it's not possible to have a legit
criticism of your religion. That pigheadedness culture is a big
part of why Linux is still a broken mess after 30 years of Desktop development. (Which is not a criticism of Linux per se, but rather
of Linux as a desktop version. The people producing it simply don't
get the point of a personal computer.)
On 12/21/2024 8:05 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
In 2024, why would it be necessary for a user to know that GIMP
didn't install because 13 obscure libraries couldn't be pulled from
their respective repositories? Why do Linux losers insist that
everyone live in the Stone Age?
As compared to DLL hell?
ÿ When's the last time you dealt with "DLL Hell"? I'd guess it's
probably been 20 years for me. The whole point of the bloated
winsxs folder is to make sure all possible versions of all possible
libraries and drivers are available. It's essentially a Windows
install DVD stored on disk. Then there's also been a trend toward
installing needed libraries in the program folder.
ÿ DLL Hell dates from a time when the number of DLLs was
minimal and MS were not careful about keeping the details straight.
(In the late 90s there were actually 3 versions of the RichEdit
library with the same name and version, which could only be
told apart by the file size! Install the wrong one and Wordpad
would break, along with anything else using a RichEdit window.
ÿ Those problems are long gone. It's been many years since it's
even been possible to overwrite system libraries. And while I've
downloaded someÿ pretty bad programs over the years, I don't
remember the last time I ran an installer and the program didn't
work, with one exception: Most Windows installers these days
are not designed to check the version and deal intelligently with
it. Even the download pages for the installers usually don't list
what Windows versions are supported. People lsapping together
.Net or Python programs can't be bothered to know what they're
doing. They expect the system to do that.
ÿÿÿ So sometimes, when I was
still using XP, the only way to tell whether a program would run
was to install it and then see whether I got an error message saying "function entry point not found". That would tell me that the program developer was using Win32 functions that post-dated XP and actually
hadn't bothered to be aware of such issues. But DLL Hell? No.
You need Win98 for that. The Linux cry of DLL Hell is as outdated
as Apple disciplies claiming that their Motorola CPU runs circles
around Intel CPUs. Eventually Apple dumped the slow Motorola
CPUs and disciples had to come up with a new excuse.
On Sat, 12/21/2024 7:21 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
In 2024, why would it be necessary for a user to know that GIMP didn't
install because 13 obscure libraries couldn't be pulled from their
respective repositories? Why do Linux losers insist that everyone live in
the Stone Age?
Ah, but they weren't "pulled from Repositories".
This was the SNAP version of GIMP. A squashfs container filled with
every library needed to make GIMP run.
<brevsnip>
I later discovered that Ubuntu does have a dual representation
for the GIMP. This is how I got myself a working setup. I removed
the SNAP and installed a .deb . Fixed.
sudo snap remove gimp
sudo apt install gimp
gimp example.heic
Paul wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
<snip>
I often wondered who did "maintenance" on the chickens, because they were in >> excellent condition, none of them seemed to be diseased or anything. But
everything the psych department did was like that. They would do the most
complicated things, to suit their religion (B.F. Skinner-ism). They had
probably conditioned a grad student, to take care of the chickens (you know, >> give the grad student electric shocks, if the work was not done).
https://simpsons.fandom.com/wiki/Seymour_Skinner
He is the principal of Springfield Elementary School, and a stereotypical
educational bureaucrat. He struggles to control the crumbling school and is
constantly engaged in a battle against its inadequate resources, apathetic
and bitter teachers, and often rowdy and unenthusiastic students, Bart
Simpson being a standout example. A strict disciplinarian, Skinner has an
uptight, militaristic attitude that stems from his years in the United
States Army as a Green Beret, which included service in the Vietnam War,
where he achieved the rank of a sergeant, according to his rank insignia.
As a result of his service in the Vietnam War, he is often plagued by
horrible memories of his involvement via post-traumatic stress disorder,
sometimes even happening at the most inopportune of times. It is also
implied that he received a severe injury during the Vietnam War on his
posterior to require a metal plate to be installed in it.
And actually, I can state from experience that they had worse stimuli
than electric shocks to apply to grad students.
Paul wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
On Sat, 12/21/2024 7:21 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
In 2024, why would it be necessary for a user to know that GIMP didn't
install because 13 obscure libraries couldn't be pulled from their
respective repositories? Why do Linux losers insist that everyone live in >>> the Stone Age?
Ah, but they weren't "pulled from Repositories".
This was the SNAP version of GIMP. A squashfs container filled with
every library needed to make GIMP run.
<brevsnip>
I later discovered that Ubuntu does have a dual representation
for the GIMP. This is how I got myself a working setup. I removed
the SNAP and installed a .deb . Fixed.
sudo snap remove gimp
sudo apt install gimp
gimp example.heic
I never use Snap. Actually shut my Ubuntu laptop semi-permanently.
I use GIMP on Win 11 as well. It's notably slower in Win 11 than it is in Linux
(Debian) with the same (dual boot) hardware. As is Qt Creator.
No, but you can not use Linux with a Windows philosophy and blame Linux
for not being your way. Linux has its own philosophy, like it or not. If
you don't like it, don't use it.
This is what you use, day-to-day, for augmenting the local file tree.
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/gctQF60w/Synaptic-Package-Manager.gif
Paul
On 12/21/2024 8:37 AM, Paul wrote:
This is what you use, day-to-day, for augmenting the local file tree.ÿÿÿ Yes. I've used it. It's confusing, poorly designed crap.
ÿÿÿ [Picture]
ÿÿÿÿ https://i.postimg.cc/gctQF60w/Synaptic-Package-Manager.gif
ÿÿ Paul
On 12/21/2024 8:37 AM, Paul wrote:
This is what you use, day-to-day, for augmenting the local file tree.ÿÿÿ Yes. I've used it. It's confusing, poorly designed crap.
ÿÿÿ [Picture]
ÿÿÿÿ https://i.postimg.cc/gctQF60w/Synaptic-Package-Manager.gif
ÿÿ Paul
On 12/21/24 05:29, Carlos E.R. wrote:
No, but you can not use Linux with a Windows philosophy and blame Linux for not being your way. Linux has its own philosophy, like it or not. If you don't like it, don't use it.
Hi Carlos,
I have to agree with you.
What I see here is what I see a lot with M$O.ÿ Libre
Office and Only Office are as good if not better
now that M$O.ÿ But it is not M$O and folks are not
willing the learn "anything new" or "different".
LO and OO have to be exact clones of M$O to please
them.
With the discussion of Linux vs Windows here, I see
the same thing.ÿ Linux is a different culture or
as you stated philosophy that Windows.ÿ If you
are not willing to learn "something new" or
"different" Linux or Windows, than do not criticize.
Oh there is no obnoxious, difficult to operate Window
Store in Linux, so don't learn how to use the
repositories and run back to an unstable kluge that
your one update away from disaster.ÿ They want Linux
to be Windows.ÿ Exactly Windows.
And instead of learning to use alternate software that
runs in Linux, they insist Linux must run Windows
only applications.ÿ Linux must be exactly Windows.
Don't criticize, Windows or Linux, if you are not willing
the learn the different cultures.
I can only describe Windows as a complete mess.ÿ It is
an unstable kluge.ÿ But if you need to run Windows,
there are ways around it and you can make it fairly
stable.
So, first find the software you are required to use, then
find an acceptable operating system to run it on .ÿ Then
live with your decision.
-T
On 12/21/24 14:46, Paul wrote:
On Sat, 12/21/2024 4:31 PM, T wrote:
On 12/21/24 05:29, Carlos E.R. wrote:
No, but you can not use Linux with a Windows philosophy and blame
Linux for not being your way. Linux has its own philosophy, like it
or not. If you don't like it, don't use it.
Hi Carlos,
I have to agree with you.
What I see here is what I see a lot with M$O. Libre
Office and Only Office are as good if not better
now that M$O. But it is not M$O and folks are not
willing the learn "anything new" or "different".
LO and OO have to be exact clones of M$O to please
them.
With the discussion of Linux vs Windows here, I see
the same thing. Linux is a different culture or
as you stated philosophy that Windows. If you
are not willing to learn "something new" or
"different" Linux or Windows, than do not criticize.
Oh there is no obnoxious, difficult to operate Window
Store in Linux, so don't learn how to use the
repositories and run back to an unstable kluge that
your one update away from disaster. They want Linux
to be Windows. Exactly Windows.
And instead of learning to use alternate software that
runs in Linux, they insist Linux must run Windows
only applications. Linux must be exactly Windows.
Don't criticize, Windows or Linux, if you are not willing
the learn the different cultures.
I can only describe Windows as a complete mess. It is
an unstable kluge. But if you need to run Windows,
there are ways around it and you can make it fairly
stable.
So, first find the software you are required to use, then
find an acceptable operating system to run it on . Then
live with your decision.
-T
It's not the same ecosystem, and Linux should not be sold
or promoted that way.
Pretending it is an exact replacement for someones Windows,
is like proposing ReactOS is a real solution.
These things have different properties, different strengths
and weaknesses.
A person has to be prepared to meet a challenge, half way.
Your tea won't be served on silverware, by a white-gloved
butler.
The same thing would happen to you, if you went to the
Apple ecosystem. "Do have this (obscure) Windows thingy?"
"No, we have this and this and this... but I can't exactly
reproduce your (obscure) Windows thingy." But
that's part of meeting them half-way, being willing
to learn new things, calibrate the offered solutions
ensuring they work (the backup methods) and so on.
So what if they don't have Disk Management.
ÿÿÿ Paul
Windows is not Mac is not Linux is not Mac is not Windows.
If you are unwilling to learn a different system, don't
criticize it.
On 12/21/2024 8:29 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
No, but you can not use Linux with a Windows philosophy and blame
Linux for not being your way. Linux has its own philosophy, like it or
not. If you don't like it, don't use it.
ÿÿ Indeed. I don't. But why must we hear this endless,
repetitive, competitive whining in Windows newsgroups?
If you want to sing the praises of Linux then go do it
in a Linux group.
On 2024-12-21 17:42, Newyana2 wrote:
On 12/21/2024 8:29 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
No, but you can not use Linux with a Windows philosophy and blame
Linux for not being your way. Linux has its own philosophy, like it
or not. If you don't like it, don't use it.
  Indeed. I don't. But why must we hear this endless,
repetitive, competitive whining in Windows newsgroups?
If you want to sing the praises of Linux then go do it
in a Linux group.
I did not start talking about Linux here. Somebody else said something
wrong about Linux and I had to correct him.
Don't criticize, Windows or Linux, if you are not willing
the learn the different cultures.
It's not the same ecosystem, and Linux should not be sold
or promoted that way.
Pretending it is an exact replacement for someones Windows,
is like proposing ReactOS is a real solution.
These things have different properties, different strengths
and weaknesses.
A person has to be prepared to meet a challenge, half way.
Your tea won't be served on silverware, by a white-gloved
butler.
The same thing would happen to you, if you went to the
Apple ecosystem. "Do have this (obscure) Windows thingy?"
"No, we have this and this and this... but I can't exactly
reproduce your (obscure) Windows thingy." But
that's part of meeting them half-way, being willing
to learn new things, calibrate the offered solutions
ensuring they work (the backup methods) and so on.
So what if they don't have Disk Management.
Paul
On 12/21/2024 4:31 PM, T wrote:
Don't criticize, Windows or Linux, if you are not willing
the learn the different cultures.
ÿÿ I'm perfectly happy to criticize both where it's relevant.
This isn't your girlfriend. It's software. One of the nicest
things about Windows is that it's the only OS that's not
also a religion.
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 4 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 190:42:01 |
| Calls: | 62 |
| Files: | 21,500 |
| Messages: | 70,960 |
