Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
-
@Hazarth I say exactly that in the "grep is 51 years old" part.
-
@Hazarth yeah there's a way the system was designed to be used and as long as people use it how it's designed it works well
but nobody knows what that is tho but the bygone wizards -
@jestdotty pretty much. Have you ever tried to use Mono on linux?! Worst tooling and package repo I ever seen. It has microsoft written all over It's slow downloads and abusive storage usage. :D
And this is obviously not limited to MS, but It's funny that they happen to be part of the bloat problem on linux eco too somehow -
@Hazarth what's Mono?
-
@kiki the entire toolset and standard libs to compile and run C# stuff. Microsoft created a version for linux (I suppose to compete with java) and it works, but whenever you update it using a package manager it pulls like 1GB+ of files... Not to mention mono itself is huge.
linux rant number 23094823094
Linux is a marvel of modern engineering. Well, at least in a sense that it somehow manages to work despite its design.
Basic commands like ls, grep, rm, cp (think busybox) do work predictably. Given that some of them are older than you and me combined (grep is 51 years old), it would've been weird if they didn't.
Yet, when comes the time to configure linux itself, there is no right way to do it — there are 5 or 6 wrong ones.
The wrong way number 1 to configure linux is to use predictable commands and their combinations. You know, cat + grep some config files, then awk to change them… If you do it, you will instantly break your system to the point that you'll have to back up your data, reinstall everything and put your data back.
All the other wrong ways are wrong because each of them will break your system in their own unique way. All of them kinda-sorta do what you want, at the expense of messing up some other things that have nothing to do with what you were trying to fix. The worst way to use them is combining one wrong way with some other one, like configuring xorg directly and then using ubuntu-specific userland config tools. This will instantly break your system too.
You'll have to google/chatgpt your way through historic quirks that are somehow still there in 2025. Remember: the worse the shell command looks, the more likely it is that it's the right way (or at least the least wrong way) to do things in linux.
Some minimal distros like alpine is a notable exception, in a way that they're more predictable, but they will become useless the moment you try to get some actual work done. I've used alpine as my desktop os for quite a while. I know what I'm talking about.
If you want so much as to install a browser, you'll have to use flatpak. But flatpak will only bail you out so many times. Your colleagues, and people that write tools that your colleagues use, are using macos, windows or ubuntu. You'll have to use whatever they're using, and if it uses glibc/is not in flatpak, well, tough cookies.
sudo apt install fuse breaks ubuntu instantly — it won't boot into graphical desktop anymore until you reinstall everything, including systemd, and do initramfs. Why does it do that in 2025? who knows.
random