Quoting: Nevertheless

Quoting: Rooster

Quoting: Nevertheless

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: AussieEevee

Quoting: ObsidianBlkThose neon warning signs are there,

I think part of the problem was that there was no neon warning signs. The only warnings Linus got was an error from popshop that wasn't clear on what was happening... and a giant wall of text from apt.

That 'wall of text' ends with "you are about to remove essential packages, type exactly, 'Yes, I know what I'm doing' to continue."

Which is more than enough to say 'stop, you're about to do something horrendous to your system.' I have made many jokes before about not being able to do flashing red text in Confluence because of people not following the wiki... But really there are two things to blame here. 1) Linus being smart enough to be dangerous. 2) Linus not being patient enough to read the warning.

Since Linux distros wait for more users coming over from the Windows realm, package managers should expect users coming that have been trained to ignore most of the text that is beeing thrown at them during installation of software. For them it is almost unthinkable that the installation of a gaming software could uninstall parts of their OS.
So I think it's an improvement that such users now actively have to search for the command that can do harm, instead of being able to use it by just ignoring something.
I would love the error message being clickable (depending on the kind of error of course), linking the user to a site where he/she can read about and report problems and solutions with the package that led to the error.

I say there are 2 issues here:
The first one 100% apt/Pop OS fault and that is that this should NEVER have happened during simple package installation, even if done from terminal.

But.. as anyone who worked with computers for a long time knows.. One of those things that should NEVER happen will eventually happen. Doesn't matter if you are on Linux, Mac or Windows. Which brings me to the second issue.

The second issue is 50% user fault and 50% Windows fault for training its users to be dumb and not read Warnings (yes even if it's a simple installation of package, user should be expected to read Warnings and Errors).

So instead of package managers having to expect that their users will not read Warnings (which imo is ridiculous), I would say that the distros aimed at new users like Mint and Pop should include a message when running the Terminal (with the option to disable the message for future) that the Terminal is a high level tool and the user is expected to read and understand potential Warnings.

In my opinion the ridiculous part here is that you need to have superuser rights to install a simple application.
There are people out there, who are something in between new users and geeks. They are people that want to use computers in a secure, private way. They don't want to mess with their OS more than nessessary. Most of them are now on Windows or Mac and not on Linux, for a reason..
I think distros like Mint and Pop are not primarily aimed at new users, but at those people, new users or not. And since Mint and Pop (and ...) don't stand in the way of more advanced users, they're good for those too.
So the question is: Do they find a way to welcome the users they're aimed at, without giving up certain principles?

You absolutely still have to have superuser rights to install Windows / Mac software too. Flatpak / Appimage / Snaps are different in this regard. While there are methods in Windows and Mac that software distributors can use to not require admin access, most of them don't bother. You still have a prompt that requires admin access to get past.

I don't know why it's ridiculous to expect people to know how to read... If you start up the terminal with 'OMG don't touch this unless you know what you're doing!!' do you think anyone would ever attempt to try playing with the terminal and learning something?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: AussieEevee

Quoting: slaapliedje2) Linus not being patient enough to read the warning.

Most newbie users aren't that patient, especially when it comes to walls of text.

The point is that apt should not have allowed him to break his system in the first place. That should not have happened, and the fault is 10% on that Steam package... and 90% on apt.

Apt is not a babysitter. It didn't even break his system. It was still working, it was just working in 'I have no Xorg anymore' mode. Which is a perfectly legitimate method of using Linux. :) It just was broken for what he was intending to do. It gave him ample warning that it was removing a bunch of crap. It's on the user to decide whether or not they want to remove all of that. He didn't even spend a second looking at it and just typed the 'yes, do as I say'. Also, has he seriously no clue that he shouldn't just copy / paste commands from random sites? That should be a known thing even for Windows users...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Nocifer

Graham's comment underneath "Hopefully this is Linus-Sebastian-proof", heh. I hope many more application developers are looking at the way Discover and APT are evolving to ensure things are a bit more idiot-proof.

Don't know if it was intentional or not, but this tidbit here kind of blatantly equates "Linus Sebastian" to "idiot", heh :P

On topic, I think it's a good thing that Linux is slowly evolving to become a bit more suitable for the wider (read: technologically illiterate) masses of users out there; that's one of the major things it still needs to tackle as far as mainstream adoption is concerned. But I do have one question: what if I intentionally do want to remove a "system critical" package like Xorg or my DE - how do I do it if package managers, both GUI and CLI, prevent me from doing so? Is there (and if there isn't, could we pretty please have one, *hint* *hint* *wink* *wink*) a toggle somewhere that can be used to disable these fail-safes? I'm personally all for user-friendliness, but only as long as it isn't taken to the extreme of actually becoming an obstacle to a more tech-headed user's workflow.

The Apt change at least lets you override things. I always thought there could be improvements to removal in general. Like say you install kde/plasma and then decide you don't want it anymore, and would rather run gnome/xfce/etc. Currently you have to remove the meta-package (kde-plasma-desktop usually) and then 'apt autoremove'. Should be like one step maybe? Then again it is rather complicated, as maybe you don't like KDE, but want Krita...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: t3gIt is totally apt's fault and I'm surprised that the Debian devs still left that option to nuke your system so easily. I'm kinda glad this happened because it is a reality check for System76 that they need to be more careful with their releases.

I agree with others that apt should do an update before installing any packages.

I think the mistake that both Pop and Ubuntu do is that they don't fetch the latest packages during install. Debian's Network Install is fantastic as the installer is easy to use, and your first boot into the system will be fully up to date.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Nevertheless

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: AussieEevee

Quoting: ObsidianBlkThose neon warning signs are there,

I think part of the problem was that there was no neon warning signs. The only warnings Linus got was an error from popshop that wasn't clear on what was happening... and a giant wall of text from apt.

That 'wall of text' ends with "you are about to remove essential packages, type exactly, 'Yes, I know what I'm doing' to continue."

Which is more than enough to say 'stop, you're about to do something horrendous to your system.' I have made many jokes before about not being able to do flashing red text in Confluence because of people not following the wiki... But really there are two things to blame here. 1) Linus being smart enough to be dangerous. 2) Linus not being patient enough to read the warning.

Since Linux distros wait for more users coming over from the Windows realm, package managers should expect users coming that have been trained to ignore most of the text that is beeing thrown at them during installation of software. For them it is almost unthinkable that the installation of a gaming software could uninstall parts of their OS.
So I think it's an improvement that such users now actively have to search for the command that can do harm, instead of being able to use it by just ignoring something.
I would love the error message being clickable (depending on the kind of error of course), linking the user to a site where he/she can read about and report problems and solutions with the package that led to the error.

Terminals typically have clickable links. So inserting that into apt would not be a terrible idea. "Your package installation causes some conflicts which may render your system unusable. Click here $(link) for more details."

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: AussieEevee

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: AussieEevee

Quoting: slaapliedjeHe typed in the 'Yes I know what I'm doing' even though he clearly did not, and nuked Xorg while it was running. Not sure how that is any fault of apt.

He typed "yes, do as I say"... and the warning was hidden in a huge wall of text. It is absolutely apt's fault.

It was quite literally the line above telling him what to type. It wasn't hidden at all.

To protect your privacy, external media requires approval to load.

Source: uploads.golmedia.net

View cookie preferences.
Accept & Show Accept All & Don't show this again   Direct Link

There's a screenshot of the error (From this very site)... It's one line in among a lot of white text that says you shouldn't do this. It is essentially hidden, and Linus is not to blame for this badly designed warning.

"You are about to do something potentially harmful" So that's not a big enough warning? How is that hidden? Right above that it says 194MB will be freed... pretty sure installing new software won't free disk space. All it would have taken him is two seconds to read that he was going to destroy something beautiful... like in Fight Club.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: AussieEevee

Quoting: ObsidianBlkThose neon warning signs are there,

I think part of the problem was that there was no neon warning signs. The only warnings Linus got was an error from popshop that wasn't clear on what was happening... and a giant wall of text from apt.

That 'wall of text' ends with "you are about to remove essential packages, type exactly, 'Yes, I know what I'm doing' to continue."

Which is more than enough to say 'stop, you're about to do something horrendous to your system.' I have made many jokes before about not being able to do flashing red text in Confluence because of people not following the wiki... But really there are two things to blame here. 1) Linus being smart enough to be dangerous. 2) Linus not being patient enough to read the warning.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ObsidianBlkSomething that might help all distributions of Linux might be a central site where users can post their Linux tutorials, organized by Distribution, Distro Version, Topic, and Date. This way, when a user comes to the site looking for a tutorial, they should always get the most recent and relevant information up front. The site could also put up a warning at the top of the site if the tutorial being viewed is for an older distribution version, or if it hasn't been updated in some specified amount of time (like "Warning, tutorial is over 6 months old and may be out of date"). The site could also implement a rating system for how successful users have been using the tutorial.

I'm just spitballing. Honestly, though, there definitely is an issue with so many disparate tutorials out there from as far back as a decade or more, and, unless you pay close attention to distro version or date information that may, or may not be in the tutorial (depending on the whims of the author) you can easily have a newbie find an Ubuntu tutorial from 5 or 10 years ago, not realize its age, and be completely lost.

I mean I think every distribution should have the level of Wiki that Arch has. If there is one thing they excel at over any other distributions (with the exception of maybe FreeBSD), is their documentation. It's very thorough, and all in one nice place.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ObsidianBlk

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: robvvI can almost hear minds whirring away, thinking, "Challenge Accepted!"

Considering the original issue from a youtuber was following commands found online, this change won't solve anything. People will just read something from an old stackoverflow thread, or ubuntu forums, or somesuch, and blindly follow that while ignoring the massive neon warning signs that it could break the system.

I half agree with this. Those neon warning signs are there, but the user may be colorblind to exactly what those warnings implied. The other issue that Linus faced, as I understand the situation, was that Pop_OS! actually had a broken Steam package at the time. So, a combination of a brand new Linux user with little (if any) familiarity with the terminology of the OS and it's numerous package distribution systems combined with an admittedly broken package that ultimately caused the warning in the first place, how was the guy even supposed to think that the simple act of installing an application could trigger the removal of his XOrg system, even with an error (that is otherwise alien to him) sitting there?

On the flip side, Linus has been heavily in the tech industry for years. Granted, he's predominantly Windows focused, but he should be well versed enough in the quirks of computers in general to know that, unless you're familiar with a particular situation, you don't just blindly ignore warnings. I get that this whole challenge is them trying to work with Linux like an Average(tm) gamer, but Linus is not. He's got more IT qualifications than an average gamer and the fact he nuked his system kinda makes me feel like he almost intentionally played dumb in this particular situation. I don't actually think he did, but he definitely came off looking like a sloppy IT professional to me in that moment.

He literally tried a command on a page, it gave him a big ol' warning that essential packages were going to be removed. He typed in the 'Yes I know what I'm doing' even though he clearly did not, and nuked Xorg while it was running. Not sure how that is any fault of apt. But I do find it amusing that I saw the changelog for this change last night as I updated my laptop. Gave me a chuckle.

But on the other side of this; Linus has 14 million subscribers. And people are interested in how this pans out for him. If he can somehow stick with Linux longer than the month that the challenge is for, it could potentially get a nice new chunk of users wanting to switch to Linux for their gaming / desktop usage.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Alm888

Quoting: FrawoHow would you demonstrate that by not buying the game?

And why shall I demonstrate anything to them? They don't care about me, I don't care about them.

Quoting: FrawoAt the current numbers of gamers that only play native Linux games they won't even recognize you, and they certainly don't loose any money by doing so.

And by purchasing their Windows-exclusive game I would be definitely recognized… as a Windows customer. Ever tried to put out fires by splashing gasoline?

Quoting: FrawoFor me, buying a windows game and playing it on Linux to make it count as a Linux sale would possibly help more.

How so? It is a taming process. Think about positive and negative feedback. By giving developers food for their misbehavior you encourage them to continue doing so. Positive feedback, you see? They had released Windows-only game, you gave them your money. Corollary: they've done everything right.
It is not my protest that matters (you are sort of right here, but not quite), but your compliance.

On the contrary, I prefer to reward and encourage good behavior. Let's face it, I have a finite amount of money and, more importantly, a finite amount of time, attention and passion. And instead of wasting it on Windows-exclusive games I prefer to concentrate on Linux-native ones. Which means not only giving money to Linux-friendly devs, but submitting bug reports and being generally helpful as well.

IMO, we should care less about those devs who spit on us and more for those who show us support (despite all difficulties: admit it, working with Linux and around its quirks is not like a walk in the park).

Quoting: FrawoBut that is just my personal stance... In the end, I just want to play games on Linux, no matter if it is Windows or Linux native.

Which means they tamed you. :)
But I'm a wild beast and will not eat from their hand.

What kind of sucks is the situations like with Aspyr. They have tried to support us in the past, but Civ6 is plagued with so many issues, a lot of people run the Windows version in Linux because the game is buggy, and the port is buggier.
It is also odd from the Steam side of things, since the purchase is multiplatform, how does it know if the cut should go to the porting house, or the publisher? Or did tgey just get a flat rate and it all goes to the publisher anyhow?

View this comment - View article - View full comments