News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The modern packager’s security nightmare by josephg on Monday February 22, 2021 @05:36AM (#26222928)
If you want your software to work everywhere, you either need to take responsibility for making it build everywhere (yes, including old versions of Debian which don’t support the versions of your dependencies you need) or you punt that work to someone else - in which case your software simply won’t work on lots of computers. From the perspective of an upstream maintainer, the status quo is pretty awful.

There’s a reason people are turning to docker - because the “portable executable” idea on Linux is so often broken by weird incompatibilities between libc versions or some important dependency being missing or broken from some users’ systems. Automatic package translation suffers the exact same problem - a dynamically linked binary you build on your computer often won’t run on my computer.

Re:The modern packager’s security nightmare by drran on Monday February 22, 2021 @06:57AM (#26223488)
If you want for your software to work everywhere, but you want to avoid compilation step, then use Perl/Python/PHP with bindings to QT/GTK.

Linux has perfect backward compatibility, I still able to compile and run 70 years old app, developed on completely different OS and processor.

IMHO, you think that your app/lib binary will work on all combinations of OS/processor flawlessly without recompilation, which is not true. Nobody promising that. It's by design.

Re:The modern packager’s security nightmare by account42 on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @07:59AM (#26249372)
> weird incompatibilities between libc versions

Care to provide some examples?