People on Hacker News are speculating that they implicitly define forking as “taking the project in a different direction in an independent repo”. The Github TOS say that everyone has the right to create a fork of any public repo in the Github sense of the word. It’s all a huge mess…

They have the audacity to use the term copyleft for that bullshit license… It doesn’t mean anything unless you have the right to fork it.

Linux all the way, for loads of practical and ethical reasons

The USB spec requires one master and one slave device, which is usually decided by which type of connector each side has. USB OTG can bypass that restriction, but I’ve only ever seen it done with micro USB or type C.

deleted by creator

I gotta give dual booting a shot. I need windows for my college’s crappy exam software, but I also can’t afford another laptop just for Linux

One of the many reasons why I use micro

I was one if those newbies who went with Arch as their first distro, but I found my home with Fedora. It’s not the most up-to-date or polished distro, but it’s by far the best all-rounder.

I love documentation like this. No need to be formal when a simple analogy works too

I don’t get how you go from “Desktop distros aren’t mature enough to have every feature under the sun” to “Linux distros are shit”

Yeah people are gonna argue about everything, and the only way you can get them to stop is to take the choice away from them. Doesn’t sound like it fits into the principles of open source software, right?

Multionitor scaling and HDR are luxuries. Some distros are working to fix them, others aren’t. The good thing is though that once the code is upstream, everyone benefits from it. Even small distros that choose to run Gnome or KDE can just change a few config files to enable all the fancy things these projects provide.

Of course that doesn’t mean smaller distros are necessarily going to do that, they have the right to be different.

We have standards like pipewire, xdg portals and wayland in active development that try to cover anything a desktop OS might need. Lately there has been a huge push towards them, as the standards they replaced weren’t future proof at all.

But I take it that you are more concerned about fragmentation of these standards. I can almost guarantee that a lot if it will just whither away with time. Noone wants to maintain ancient protocols like X11 anymore. We might have another turbulent few years in this transition, but the end result will be worth it.

And I don’t get what you mean with compatibility exactly. There are lots of ways to define that, and the Linux desktop is excellent in many of them. We have xwayland for legacy applications, loads of translation layers to bring together older graphics APIs under the main vulkan drivers, WINE to run windows software, etc. You’re gonna have to be more specific there.

And why are they so shit in your opinion?

Linux runs people’s cars, phones, routers, sometimes even fridges. And don’t even get me started on servers. Linux is the most useful OS on the planet. The desktop is just another thing for it to conquer.

TIL Pulsar exists

deleted by creator

Both are important. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to resort to containers, VMs, or compiling from source, just because some application decided to only provide packages for Arch or Debian.

I never had any problems printing or scanning on Linux. Meanwhile my dad’s PC bluescreens from opening the driver UI.

Okay that is the first argument for it I’ve read that actually makes sense

If we need warning lights for self driving cars, the technology is not ready.