this is sad [LWN.net]

this is sad

Posted Jun 18, 2016 13:01 UTC (Sat) by NAR (subscriber, #1313)
In reply to: this is sad by HelloWorld
Parent article: Klumpp: A few words about the future of the Limba project

"security vulnerabilities in poorly-maintained packages."

Do I care if there's a "security vulnerability" in the DVD authoring software that I've just used? No. Do I care if there's a "security vulnerability" in the CD copying software I've just used? No. Do I want them to break because a Firefox upgrade pulls in upgrades with incompatible changes in some shared library that these applications use? Hell no. I rather have 10 versions of the same DLL on my system if the 10 applications using them work than hoping every time I upgrade something something else breaks.

to post comments

false dichotomy

Posted Jun 18, 2016 13:28 UTC (Sat) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link] (2 responses)

It's entirely possible to have the best of both worlds nowadays, just because library dependencies can be shared doesn't mean they have to. Flatpak otoh forces libraries to be bundled.

false dichotomy

Posted Jun 18, 2016 15:55 UTC (Sat) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (1 responses)

Flatpak forces bundling of libraries that are not part of the runtime. Runtimes get shared. I expect as it matures you could combine runtimes. Whatever ostree supports.

false dichotomy

Posted Jun 18, 2016 20:56 UTC (Sat) by alexl (guest, #19068) [Link]

ostree deduplicates/shares any identical files. Of course thats not the same as one being updated when the other is...