this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2025
145 points (96.8% liked)

Linux

52732 readers
377 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The diversity of Linux distributions is one of its strengths, but it can also be challenging for app and game development. Where do we need more standards? For example, package management, graphics APIs, or other aspects of the ecosystem? Would such increased standards encourage broader adoption of the Linux ecosystem by developers?

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Small thing about filesystem dialogs. In file open/save dialogs some apps group directories at the top and others mix them in alphabetically with files. My preference is for them to be grouped, but being consistent either way would be nice.

[–] irotsoma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 3 days ago

Not offering a solution here exactly, but as a software engineer and architect, this is not a Linux only problem. This problem exists across all software. There are very few applications that are fully self contained these days because it's too complex to build everything from scratch every time. And a lot of software depends on the way that some poorly documented feature worked at the time that was actually a bug and was eventually fixed and then breaks the applications that depended on it, etc. Also, any time improvements are made in a library application it has potential to break your application, and most developers don't get time to test the every newer version.

The real solution would be better CI/CD build systems that automatically test the applications with newer versions of libraries and report dependencies better. But so many applications are short on automated unit and integration tests because it's tedious and so many companies and younger developers consider it a waste of time/money. So it would only work in well maintained and managed open source types of applications really. But who has time for all that?

Anyway, it's something I've been thinking about a lot at my current job as an architect for a major corporation. I've had to do a lot of side work to get things even part of the way there. And I don't have to deal with multiple OSes and architectures. But I think it's an underserved area of software development and distribution that is just not "fun" enough to get much attention. I'd love to see it at all levels of software.

[–] asudox@lemmy.asudox.dev 19 points 4 days ago

Flatpak with more improvements to size and sandboxing could be accepted as the standard packaging format in a few years. I think sandboxing is a very important factor as Linux distros become more popular.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 21 points 4 days ago (8 children)

I'd say games. I'd that really takes off, Linux would replace Windows and all other standards will follow.

[–] verdigris@lemmy.ml 14 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Have you tried recently? We've been pretty much at parity for years now. Almost every game that doesn't run is because the devs are choosing to make it that way.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 10 points 3 days ago

It did really take off about 5 years ago.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works 16 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Stability and standardisation within the kernel for kernel modules. There are plenty of commercial products that use proprietary kernel modules that basically only work on a very specific kernel version, preventing upgrades.

Or they could just open source and inline their garbage kernel modules…

I’m struggling with this now. There’s an out of tree module I want upstreamed, but the author (understandably) doesn’t want to put in the work to upstream, so I did. The upstream folks are reluctant to take it because I didn’t actually write it.

I really don’t know what to do.

[–] fxdave@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't use any of these, but I'm curious. Could you please write some examples?

It mostly affects people working with ”fun” enterprise hardware or special purpose things.

But to take one example, proprietary drivers for high performance network cards, most likely from Nvidia.

[–] smiletolerantly@awful.systems 16 points 4 days ago

At this point, package management is the main differentiating factor between distro (families). Personally, I'm vehemently opposed to erasing those differences.

The "just use flatpak!" crowd is kind of correct when we're talking solely about Linux newcomers, but if you are at all comfortable with light troubleshooting if/when something breaks, each package manager has something unique und useful to offer. Pacman and the AUR a a good example, but personally, you can wring nixpkgs Fron my cold dead hands.

And so you will never get people to agree on one "standard" way of packaging, because doing your own thing is kind of the spirit of open source software.

But even more importantly, this should not matter to developers. It's not really their job to package the software, for reasons including that it's just not reasonable to expect them to cater to all package managers. Let distro maintainers take care of that.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›