The GNU/Linux Corner

I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that
User avatar
asf
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 477
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by asf »

microsoft is a joke
User avatar
twig
The Only Good Commie
Posts: 77
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by twig »

Pipeweed wrote: March 19th, 2024, 15:01
ok let me rephrase the question:
is it possible to get software graphics xorg or wayland on a machine without a gpu?
basically i want to run it in simple framebuffer :rip:
Yes. Just run xvfb. I'm running tests for my gamedev project that way.

Example:
xvfb glxinfo -B
Last edited by twig on April 1st, 2024, 10:56, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 10010
Joined: Feb 2, '23
Contact:

Post by rusty_shackleford »

it seems file-roller is no longer maintained and some update broke drag+drop with it, what do you guys use instead?
User avatar
Nemesis
Director of Synchronous Communication Channels
Posts: 491
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by Nemesis »

Thunar, the file explorer, compresses when you right-click on a file and save the archive with the extension of your choice, i.e. .tar.gz, .7z, or .zip, using the appropriate tool to compress. It also handles expanding an archive if you click on it.

Otherwise, I use terminal tools: zip/unzip, atool, 7z, tar.
Last edited by Nemesis on April 3rd, 2024, 02:38, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
WaterMage
Posts: 288
Joined: Sep 30, '23

Post by WaterMage »

Why so many companies insist in the every day more heavy and bloated launchers?

I don't get it. Origin some years ago used to consume only 36M of RAM. 2011 skyrim launcher used to consume only few MB of RAM too. Nowadays, EA APP consumes over 600M. LAri Launcher for BG3 takes over 800M.

And I don't get. If you just wanna make a launcher to check updates updates, maybe run a mod and an ad, you can make it in less than 150 lines of code in C with SDL. Hell, Heroic Games Launcher which is open source barely consumes 8M and comes with a lot of useful resources. EA APP is giving me a lot of troubles.

To be clear, I'm not complaining. When I first started to use Linux, I used Debian 6 and had a lot of tourble running even older games like Morrowind. Nowadays, I can run over 90% of the games that I wanna flawlessly with no problem. Is only anti cheat and launchers giving me trouble and am creating this thread to see if I can understand why so many proprietary launchers needs to be so heavy and looks like they do everything that they can to make it as hard as possible to run in Linux.
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 10010
Joined: Feb 2, '23
Contact:

Post by rusty_shackleford »

WaterMage wrote: April 4th, 2024, 20:41
Why so many companies insist in the every day more heavy and bloated launchers?

I don't get it. Origin some years ago used to consume only 36M of RAM. 2011 skyrim launcher used to consume only few MB of RAM too. Nowadays, EA APP consumes over 600M. LAri Launcher for BG3 takes over 800M.

And I don't get. If you just wanna make a launcher to check updates updates, maybe run a mod and an ad, you can make it in less than 150 lines of code in C with SDL. Hell, Heroic Games Launcher which is open source barely consumes 8M and comes with a lot of useful resources. EA APP is giving me a lot of troubles.

To be clear, I'm not complaining. When I first started to use Linux, I used Debian 6 and had a lot of tourble running even older games like Morrowind. Nowadays, I can run over 90% of the games that I wanna flawlessly with no problem. Is only anti cheat and launchers giving me trouble and am creating this thread to see if I can understand why so many proprietary launchers needs to be so heavy and looks like they do everything that they can to make it as hard as possible to run in Linux.
because they embed chrome
User avatar
asf
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 477
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by asf »

chrome is cancer
User avatar
BobT
Posts: 842
Joined: Jan 29, '24
Location: USA

Post by BobT »

rusty_shackleford wrote: April 4th, 2024, 20:42
WaterMage wrote: April 4th, 2024, 20:41
Why so many companies insist in the every day more heavy and bloated launchers?

I don't get it. Origin some years ago used to consume only 36M of RAM. 2011 skyrim launcher used to consume only few MB of RAM too. Nowadays, EA APP consumes over 600M. LAri Launcher for BG3 takes over 800M.

And I don't get. If you just wanna make a launcher to check updates updates, maybe run a mod and an ad, you can make it in less than 150 lines of code in C with SDL. Hell, Heroic Games Launcher which is open source barely consumes 8M and comes with a lot of useful resources. EA APP is giving me a lot of troubles.

To be clear, I'm not complaining. When I first started to use Linux, I used Debian 6 and had a lot of tourble running even older games like Morrowind. Nowadays, I can run over 90% of the games that I wanna flawlessly with no problem. Is only anti cheat and launchers giving me trouble and am creating this thread to see if I can understand why so many proprietary launchers needs to be so heavy and looks like they do everything that they can to make it as hard as possible to run in Linux.
because they embed chrome
Yep. It's the only thing that the bootcamp pajeets know how to do.
Even Steam is completely reliant on specific Chrome versions now.
Mass Effect Legendary edition uses a launcher that renders the games unplayable on Windows versions that the original games were released for, lol.
User avatar
SpellSword
Posts: 171
Joined: Jun 15, '23

Post by SpellSword »

Looks like someone was caught placing a backdoor in XZ Utils:
. The XZ Backdoor: Everything You Need to Know (Wired)
. What we know about the xz Utils backdoor that almost infected the world (Ars Technica)
Wired wrote:
What Does the Backdoor Do?

Malicious code added to xz Utils versions 5.6.0 and 5.6.1 modified the way the software functions. The backdoor manipulated sshd, the executable file used to make remote SSH connections. Anyone in possession of a predetermined encryption key could stash any code of their choice in an SSH login certificate, upload it, and execute it on the backdoored device. No one has actually seen code uploaded, so it's not known what code the attacker planned to run. In theory, the code could allow for just about anything, including stealing encryption keys or installing malware.
Ars Technica wrote:
Image
User avatar
asf
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 477
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by asf »

Interesting story, chinks spent years trying to bundle the thing in a way that is very hard to detect, their efforts averted only because someone decided to sperg enough about some performance variances in that version. If that can happen even in core linux libraries, imagine what other crap is floating around, specially in a world with infinite 'mandated updates' crap.

It also highlights the stupidity of systemd, linking against everything under the sun is such a good idea.
Last edited by asf on April 6th, 2024, 15:24, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply