Flatpaks have the concept of runtimes; instead of downloading the entire qt tooling for a qt app the app could just use the KDE runtime same goes for GTK with the Gnome runtime. Flatpaks also have dependencies which can be shared between multiple apps even when they are not part of their runtimes, they are called "baseapps". Flatpak apps still use double the space my normal apps take on a fresh install, so I assume using appimages to replace them will leave no space on my SSD.
Before deciding to settle on using Flatpak I tried to search for appimage permissions and how to set them, but it seems there is no such thing? If that's true then there's another advantage for Flatpaks and Snaps.
Also with all due respect: Flatpak and Snap tooling are not maintained by Probonodb.
What do you mean by AppImage permissions? A sandboxing feature like “access only those directories, those /dev devices, …”
EDIT: obviously this isn’t just for AppImage, but I tested it with AppImage and it work well. Another tip: if you want a package manager for managing AppImage installations try zap (github.com/srevinsaju/zap)
I really, really want to like Darktable, mostly because of the name lol. I must’ve tried it 8 or 10 times over the years, but I just can’t get my head around it. Something about the design language or the UI or something just doesn’t click for me and I can’t get decent images out of it. So I keep going back to Rawtherapee, even though I’d rather not…
Personally i’m okay with the UI, but the default rendering is often so bad that I have to “fix” every single image. To me it’s either Raw therapee or just reboot into Windows …
You should make a style to apply that brings you (close) to what you want. Out of the box, dakrtable shows you a minimally processed image. Its your job to take it from there.
It shows me a very wrongly processed image. It was better when I used Fuji, but even then it was never anywhere close to what an unprocessed bland raw file should like.
This is too vague to provide any further guidance. Again, darktable shows you a minimally processed raw image by default. You can get a good looking rendering by adding a few more modules in a style and applying that style by default.
Yes, and I understand the process pretty well I think, as well as what I’m striving to output (long time Lightroom user). But the DT just doesn’t respond how I expect it to, with unexpected results. Frustrating.
Wasn’t aware of the pixls site though; I like that idea!
I use Emacs + spacemacs in VI mode as a base for all my text editing on both Linux and windows (which is unfortunately required for work on occasion) machines.
For dev environments I mostly use nix + direnv + direnv-mode.
For C# I use the above plus omnisharp-roslyn + lsp-mode.
I tinker in all sorts of languages, and they all have at least basic support in the Emacs ecosystem. The popular ones should have fully functional language servers and debugger adapters.
I use Emacs + spacemacs in VI mode as a base for all my text editing
Do you specifically prefer using Spacemacs as a base over Doom Emacs? Or is the usage of Spacemacs primarily attributable to it coming earlier to the scene?
Furthermore, as you’re using it in “VI mode”, would it be fair to assume that you’ve got some experience/history with Neo(Vim) as well? If so, what led you to making the switch from (Neo)Vim to Emacs?
For dev environments I mostly use nix + direnv + direnv-mode.
Very interesting! Relying on Nix rather than Distrobox has been something I’ve been pondering upon. But besides the fact that I’m still very new to Nix as an ecosystem, I’ve also got my concerns related to what degree the containers can be sandboxed. Do you happen to have some insights on this?
Or is the usage of Spacemacs primarily attributable to it coming earlier to the scene?
Yeah, pretty much just that. If was to start again now I’d consider other options, but I have no serious complaints about spacemacs. I probably would have never got into Emacs at all if I had to start with vanilla.
Furthermore, as you’re using it in “VI mode”, would it be fair to assume that you’ve got some experience/history with Neo(Vim) as well? If so, what led you to making the switch from (Neo)Vim to Emacs?
Yeah, I used VIM (and I still do when I’m in an unfamiliar environment), but only before neovim existed. IMO Lisp is what makes Emacs great, and vimscript is (was?) an absolute nightmare for anything complex. I don’t think lua is a bad language, but I’ll still take Lisp any day for this purpose.
I’ve also got my concerns related to what degree the containers can be sandboxed. Do you happen to have some insights on this?
What I described isn’t using containers. Nix just provides an environment for processes to run in, and direnv-mode ensures it’s using the right environment for a given buffer in Emacs. So for example I don’t have OmniSharp or dotnet in my user $PATH, but they are provided by the nix expression in a particular project directory. That allows lsp-mode to start OmniSharp as a language server, or I can run dotnet build using the Emacs compile command.
You can define containers with nix and manage them with nixos-container. I do that for testing server deployments, or running sandboxed services, but I’ve never needed something that complex for a dev shell.
I probably would have never got into Emacs at all if I had to start with vanilla.
Very interesting. I assume this is due to the amount of effort that would have been required for it to acquire some of the functionality you were expecting out of it. Am I right?
IMO Lisp is what makes Emacs great, and vimscript is (was?) an absolute nightmare for anything complex. I don’t think lua is a bad language, but I’ll still take Lisp any day for this purpose.
This is actually a great point that I somehow completely ignored so far. I intend to put my teeth in GNU Guix at some point in the future. As Guile Scheme and Lisp are -to my knowledge- at least in some way related, using Emacs should at least provide an excellent platform for me to get accustomed to what it is yet to come. Thanks for mentioning that!
What I described isn’t using containers. Nix just provides an environment for processes to run in, and direnv-mode ensures it’s using the right environment for a given buffer in Emacs. So for example I don’t have OmniSharp or dotnet in my user $PATH, but they are provided by the nix expression in a particular project directory. That allows lsp-mode to start OmniSharp as a language server, or I can run dotnet build using the Emacs compile command.
That sounds very compelling! Thanks for that insight! Perhaps I should stop procrastinating and get on with learning Nix 😅.
You can define containers with nix and manage them with nixos-container. I do that for testing server deployments, or running sandboxed services, but I’ve never needed something that complex for a dev shell.
I assume this is due to the amount of effort that would have been required for it to acquire some of the functionality you were expecting out of it. Am I right?
I didn’t really understand what Emacs was at the time, I just got fed up with trying to make vim into an IDE. Out of the box, spacemacs had good language support, modal editing, and looked ‘modern’.
What I love about Emacs now is Lisp and the package ecosystem. I have 396 packages installed, and many of them interact in quite complex ways. When I do a package upgrade it pretty much pulls the latest from the development branch of each package. Some packages haven’t been changed in 10 years, some are changed daily. It’s bleeding edge everything, and things don’t actually break that much. Lisp makes for (obviously IMO) beautiful, simple code, so most packages are a pleasure to fix, extend, or automate.
I intend to put my teeth in GNU Guix at some point in the future.
Me too, but I nix has served me well, so I haven’t been motivated.
Thank you so much for your insights! Much appreciated!
Some packages haven’t been changed in 10 years, some are changed daily. It’s bleeding edge everything, and things don’t actually break that much. Lisp makes for (obviously IMO) beautiful, simple code, so most packages are a pleasure to fix, extend, or automate.
I want to have a better idea for much time is spend on ‘management’; fix, extend and/or automate etc.
This was actually triggered by upgrading omnisharp, which started sending a new notification that lsp-mode didn’t explicitly ignore.
By the time I hit it, that issue had already been reported, so I was able to quickly work around it with a snippet in my main config. I could have also just rolled back omnisharp.
Most problems I’ve had have been solved by upgrading spacemacs to latest.
My problem with appimage is that they never work. Every time I tried one, best case scenario it crashed with a random error message. All attempts to fix them were damn near impossible to debug.
It honestly felt like they were not universal enough and still relied on certain libraries being available on OS. Hopefully I’m wrong because that would completely defeat their purpose. I stopped wasting time on them after Plex and VLC both failed to run reliably and switched to flatpak that “just works” 100% of the time.
To be honest most of the time I look for an rpm anyway. Flatpaks are always a last resort. I’m on OpenSuse Tumbleweed.
This was my experience as well as a developer trying to package an application as an appimage. Creating an appimage that works on your machine is easy. Creating one that actually works on other distros can be damn near impossible unless everything is statically linked and self contained in the first place. In contrast, flatpak’s developer experience is much easier and if it runs, you can be pretty sure it runs elsewhere as well.
What if, sometime after Win 10 loses support a virus takes advantage of the lack of patches and propagates across all the machines with a simple message “This operating system is no longer supported, please click here to upgrade.” The button then runs a script to download and install a user friendly Linux distro. The world is then saved.
Do people actually use LXD in production? All hosting services I’ve seen use LXC and not LXD for containers, as do UIs like Proxmox and Unraid, and you don’t have to use Snap for LXC.
So you pretend that what was running on windows to run in Linux?. Dafuq people are naive af. We are talking mostly enterprise machines, most corporations didnt migrate to windows 11. So its not just installing steam lol
No, those computers can go to underprivileged communities so ppl can have access to word processor, programming, web dev, etc. They would be running Linux and be secure and functional.
Nvim is more optimised, while emacs is more extensible. Basically you can modify core parts of emacs while it runs. I tend to use both, depending on the situation, with a lighter nvim config. Sometimes the 3 second emacs startup time is annoying so I use vim then. I think its fine to try both.
Regarding emacs declining popularity, I think that in the long term it could be a problem, since most people don’t want to learn elisp just to configure their editor. Elisp is very powerful in emacs, but its design is very different to other languages, so as emacs contributors get older, it could possibly lead to less and less new contributors.
Idk about the vim distros, but I think Doom Emacs is easier for beginners to get into.
Sometimes the 3 second emacs startup time is annoying so I use vim then.
The way I get around this is by using emacs in daemon mode. So it only has a long startup if I’ve just rebooted my computer or if I needed to change my config and manually restart emacs. You probably already know emacs can run as a daemon, but I thought I’d mention it anyway!
I tend to use both, depending on the situation, with a lighter nvim config. Sometimes the 3 second emacs startup time is annoying so I use vim then. I think its fine to try both.
Could you elaborate more upon your workflow? Like, in which situation do you prefer Emacs and when do you prefer Neovim? I get that the lighter option is preferred when you want to perform a quick edit or can’t be bothered with startup time. But I want to know it beyond that and -if possible- what led you to favor one over the other in each situation.
Regarding emacs declining popularity, I think that in the long term it could be a problem, since most people don’t want to learn elisp just to configure their editor. Elisp is very powerful in emacs, but its design is very different to other languages, so as emacs contributors get older, it could possibly lead to less and less new contributors.
How do you envision Emacs’ future? Would, at some moment in the future, some kind of compatibility layer of sorts be developed that lower the entrance barrier? To my knowledge, Emacs has -contrary to Vim- been more open to community development. So I don’t expect something like NeoVim to be developed for Emacs as there’s less need for it. But I don’t know how much they’d be willing to change Emacs for the sake of making it more attractive for new users.
Idk about the vim distros, but I think Doom Emacs is easier for beginners to get into.
Compared to Spacemacs I assume*. If so, would you mind elaborating?
I’m not using lsp in Neovim so if I need lsp I’ll just pull out emacs. If I’m already in the terminal I’ll usually pull out Neovim to edit a file, but if I’m writing like markdown or something that uses images I like the ability to display images inline in emacs. LaTeX is always something I do in emacs because there’s a built in pdf viewer in emacs and there’s built in spell check also. In the terminal in emacs, sometimes I open up Neovim to do a quick edit because of muscle memory from the terminal. One thing that’s really cool about Neovim is that you can embed it in other applications, so if I really have to use an ide that’s not emacs, I’ll just do that.
I don’t use Neovim for complex tasks, because personally I find it a bit hard to discover commands compared to emacs. The menubar in emacs is really useful for finding useful commands in different major and minor modes.
Yeah there’s a thing called EAF, which allows python and javascript to be embedded in emacs. It allows for more complex applications to be built in emacs, similar to VSCode. I’m not sure how difficult it is to make something with EAF, but I haven’t really seen any things written in it that aren’t in the EAF organization. I think the future could be EAF or maybe something like EAF to be able to leverage the power of the javascript ecosystem like how VSCode does for a lot of plugins. There have been some attempts to rewrite emacs in different languages, but emacs is too large, and you would lose the old ecosystem by doing that.
There’s a larger community around Doom Emacs, and Doom Emacs looks nicer. Honestly though it doesn’t matter that much which one you use since they are both pretty good.
I’m not using lsp in Neovim so if I need lsp I’ll just pull out emacs. If I’m already in the terminal I’ll usually pull out Neovim to edit a file, but if I’m writing like markdown or something that uses images I like the ability to display images inline in emacs. LaTeX is always something I do in emacs because there’s a built in pdf viewer in emacs and there’s built in spell check also. In the terminal in emacs, sometimes I open up Neovim to do a quick edit because of muscle memory from the terminal. One thing that’s really cool about Neovim is that you can embed it in other applications, so if I really have to use an ide that’s not emacs, I’ll just do that.
Wow, the insights! Vehemently noting these down somewhereHeck, I think you’ve cracked the code. Since I’ve created these posts, I became more and more aware of how great both Emacs and (Neo)Vim are. And while I was already flirting with the idea to perhaps use both, I think you’ve just completely obliterated any other option; which is a good thing. As such, I’m actually grasping for words that would somehow be able to properly convey the feelings of gratitude I currently experience. For whatever it’s worth; thank you from the bottom of my heart!
Yeah there’s a thing called EAF, which allows python and javascript to be embedded in emacs. It allows for more complex applications to be built in emacs, similar to VSCode. I’m not sure how difficult it is to make something with EAF, but I haven’t really seen any things written in it that aren’t in the EAF organization. I think the future could be EAF or maybe something like EAF to be able to leverage the power of the javascript ecosystem like how VSCode does for a lot of plugins. There have been some attempts to rewrite emacs in different languages, but emacs is too large, and you would lose the old ecosystem by doing that.
Once more; much appreciated!
There’s a larger community around Doom Emacs, and Doom Emacs looks nicer. Honestly though it doesn’t matter that much which one you use since they are both pretty good.
Yet again; I’m grateful! Have a good one! I wish you and your loved ones the best!
Microsoft: Arbitrarily increases the system requirements for Windows 11 even though it runs perfectly fine on older pcs just to get people to buy new computers
As I understand it, it wasn’t arbitrary. Microsoft has wanted to require TPMs for two decades at this point. Once there’s high enough adoption they can roll out their version of trusted computing.
There is a link immediately over the headline in the url I shared. Read the report. I used to sell green asset disposition of electronics. It’s been an industry for a long time. It makes a difference. See what you want to see man. I can intro you to people in that business if you’d like to pick their brains. I don’t know who owns this at Microsoft but I can ask contacts there, if you’d like me to help get you an intro.
I found it absolutely amazing they claim my pretty decent laptop from 2016 can’t run Windows 11. Laptops haven’t gotten that much better since then. Also, supposing it actually couldn’t, it’s a fucking operating system. It should be doing everything it can to stay out of the way. What kind of bloated monstrosity is Windows 11 that my laptop can’t run it?
It’s the trusted platform module which I know almost nothing about but I’m sure is fucking stupid. My monster of a desktop from 2018 also can’t run win11, and the only reason is my cpu is missing the tpm that it requires.
I think Microsoft should actually be forced to either extend support or give the user one option to be secured. With the later I mean pay for license or click here to automatically choose a Linux distro that the user will be migrated to. It could be Mint or one of MS own Linux distribution with OneDrive preinstalled and links to Office 365 online word. Even install Android could be one option.
This is better than getting all the devices on the landfill.
Remember that 99% don’t know what to do with their computer or are lazy. One easy fix should be available.
The thought of this makes me feel a lot of emotions at once. I don’t think any are good… If MS made a version of Linux, I can’t even fathom how insanely badly they would fuck it up, nor can I imagine it ever happening. I cannot think of an analogy to illustrate this properly really. But yeah, hell freezing over seems like a starting point for describing the likelihood of it.
I have fantasized that MS will come to terms with how shit their core OS is and eventually make something Linux like, based on a lot of free stuff. But that feels 20 years off, and like an absolute fantasy still.
I think with the current staff in the ranks at Microsoft and leadership opening the ecosystem for end user devices, they could build something sound. (Don’t sleep on the amount of our world infrastructure running on their OS’s. They are trusted for reliability.) A decade ago I had to reprimand by team for showing up to a mtg in Redmond with a stack of MacBooks and iPads. Now staff have iPhones.
The problem is the business looks for a buck in all the wrong parts of their massively horizontal set of goods. So their Linux will be bloated with cross selling adware.
Chief, MS has multiple internal only Linux distros and publically they have CBL-Mariner and I think another that I forgot. They are mostly used with Azure. They really aren’t that much more different to what I know to any other (common) distro out there
I don’t think they would do Linux. Better if they did a stripped down version of their OS that can run like Chrome OS. Secured with a web browser. Little maintenance as so much has been removed.
It probably is. But MS choose how they want to keep the control of the users. But just leaving them like this is just bad. I feel EU should force them to give a solution since the computer came with Windows so it is their responsibility.
One alternative is to give them Chrome OS, or they might prefer building their of version of it.
Today I see a computer as end of life when it is to slow to view webpages. Often like when it is to little RAM available or the CPU is really too slow. Then I think Microsoft could stop caring about it.
linux
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.