this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
446 points (94.8% liked)

linuxmemes

20751 readers
1390 users here now

I use Arch btw

Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
poopsmith@lemmy.world
zephyr@lemmy.world
446
My impression of github since switching to Linux (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by Alk@lemmy.world to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I've been transitioning to Linux recently and have been forced to use github a lot when I hadn't much before. Here is my assessment.

Every github project is named something like dbutils, Jason's cool photo picker, or jibbly, and was forked from an abandoned project called EHT-sh (acronym meaning unknown) originally made by frederick lumberg, forked and owned by boops_snoops and actively maintained by Xxweeb-lord69xX.

There are either 3 lines of documentation and no releases page, or a 15 page long readme with weekly releases for the last 15 years and nothing in between. It is either for linux, windows, or both. If it's for windows, they will not specify what platforms it runs on. If it's for Linux, there's a 50% chance there are no releases and 2 lines of commands showing how to build it (which doesn't work on your distro), but don't worry because your distro has it prepackaged 1 version out of date and it magically appears on flatpak only after you've installed it by other means. Everything is written in python2. It is illegal to release anything for Mac OS on github.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 27 points 3 weeks ago (17 children)

If your distro was arch, you most likely have the nightly build available on the AUR

[–] UnityDevice@startrek.website 26 points 3 weeks ago (14 children)

Aur and pacman are 90% of why I use arch.

Also fyi to OP: never install software system-wide without your package manager. No sudo make install, no curl .. | sudo bash or whatever the readme calls for. Not because it's unsafe, but because eventually you're likely to end up with a broken system, and then you'll blame your distro for it, or just Linux in general.

My desktop install is about a decade old now, and never broke because I only ever use the package manager.

Of course in your home folder anything goes.

[–] Nilz@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

never install software system-wide without your package manager.

What's the alternative of sudo make install and curl | sudo bash if a package is not available in AUR? I am unfamiliar with make install .

[–] UnityDevice@startrek.website 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Well personally if a package is not on aur I first check if there's an appimage available, or if there's a flatpak. If neither exist, I generally make a package for myself.

It sounds intimidating, but for most software the package description is just gonna be a single file of maybe 10-15 lines. It's a useful skill to learn and there's lots of tutorials explaining how to get into it, as well as the arch wiki serving as documentation. Not to mention, every aur or arch package can be looked at as an example, just click the "view PKGBUILD" link on the side on the package view. You can even simply download an existing package with git clone and just change some bits.

Alternatively you can just make it locally and use it like that, i.e. just run make without install.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)