News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Simple Systems Have Less Downtime. Parent comment

Re:Simple Systems Have Less Downtime by busterarm on Tuesday March 03, 2020 @10:33AM (#22475245)
Hardly. I've maybe had to do that 5 times in the last...10 years?

And I split my time between Arch, CentOS & OpenBSD. The vast majority of things these days are packaged in a useful way. There's also flatpak and similar now.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Simple Systems Have Less Downtime by AnIdiotOnTheNet on Tuesday March 03, 2020 @03:00PM (#22478214)
> I've maybe had to do that 5 times in the last...10 years?

Good for you. Some of us have to install up to date software more often than every 5 or 10 years.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Simple Systems Have Less Downtime by busterarm on Tuesday March 03, 2020 @03:29PM (#22478432)
I'm running Arch on my office workstation. I install up to date software literally every day.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Simple Systems Have Less Downtime by AnIdiotOnTheNet on Wednesday March 04, 2020 @09:12AM (#22483880)
Only after a third party makes an AUR for it. I'll stick to an OS where the developer can publish directly to the users without 15 different packaging formats, thanks.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Simple Systems Have Less Downtime by ailideex on Wednesday March 04, 2020 @10:26AM (#22484507)
Again, flatpak, appimage, docker ... you can use one of these, don't have to use 15.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Simple Systems Have Less Downtime by AnIdiotOnTheNet on Wednesday March 04, 2020 @11:05AM (#22484878)
No, the developer can choose one of these. As a user, I have to deal with all of them because I cannot choose how the developer distributes it and there is no standard. If I could choose, I'd use AppImage for everything (since it is the only one that is portable) but I can't do that.
[ Parent | on HN ]