I’ve never talked to an Arch user about Linux, so I dunno how toxic their community is. But I do read Arch documentation, and it’s fantastic. Arch’s documentation has (for me, anyway) taken the place that used to be held by the old HOWTOs back in the early days.

The kind of cooperation required to accomplish this doesn’t speak of a toxic community to me. I didn’t watch the video since I don’t watch YouTube on my phone, but I’m guessing it’s not the Arch community that has issues but annoying teenage “I’m more 1337 than you” jackwads that are the turd in the Linux punchbowl. Those little cretins are drawn to distros like Arch because they like feeling superior to the “normie” users.

I should know, I used to be like that thirty years ago. Most of us grow out of it after we start getting laid.

Install xterm. Bam, you’ve got sixel support.

So it did. That’s interesting.

It was the fact that they used RPMs that made me think they were a Red Hat derivative. I didn’t care for Red Hat (I ran Slackware back then, switching to Debian around Hamm) so I never gave them a chance. Pity.

It never caught on in the states.

IIRC it was originally based on Red Hat (back when Red Hat Linux was a thing), wasn’t it?

Sounds normal. The Linux kernel shipped by most distros detects (most of) the hardware automatically, and if you’re using UUID mounts in fstab all your filesystems will be in the right place. Your network config is probably newly generated, but unless you’re using wireless you probably won’t notice.

You might check to see if Windows has deactivated itself.

Oh, I’ve got no complaints about the article or even its title. Few people learn Perl or Raku these days so it would be surprising for most people.

I thought it was interesting myself - Perl’s my go-to scripting language but I never used Raku. I might consider it next time I have a non-trivial scripting project.

I’m not sure why that’s surprising. Raku started out as Perl 6. Perl was designed primarily for use in a shell environment. Convenience features like the arguments to MAIN bit are in line with Perl philosophy.

Why do I care about the state of the code? It works. Perhaps all these people complaining are really just sick of your proselytization.

To paraphrase Terry Pratchett, “You only get one life. You can pick up five causes on any street corner.”

That’s cool and all, but why would I want to? Display systems are invisible when they work right, and X has worked right for me (save for some pre-EDID config issues) since the 90s. I run a program, it pops up on my screen and I interact with it. That’s all I ask of it.

None of the issues I’ve had with X (drivers, mostly) will be resolved with Wayland. For me, it’s a solution in search of a problem. The only reason I have even a passing interest is that it’s (theoretically) easier to maintain and change as computing changes.

I’ll move to Wayland when I have to, but right now there’s no reason to not use X.

I wasn’t clear. I meant that the issues with X crashing were usually driver issues. I have no idea about Wayland - I don’t use it since it doesn’t do what I want by design.

X does the job well enough to be invisible to most people. Yes, we need a clean start in order to move forward efficiently (lots of assumptions about computer displays from the 80s no longer apply), but it’s good enough for most people’s needs.

Why bother with a display server? Some people - like myself - actually use that functionality. It’s not part of the design for Wayland. Personally, I think that’s a mistake - especially as things become more cloud-based - but I’m obviously in the minority.

Wayland wasn’t the first attempt at replacing X. It has made more traction than any other attempt, though. There’s no real hurry - it’s not like X eats your babies and runs over your dog.

As far as robustness goes, that’s mostly the driver. I’ve yet to see a bulletproof display system, commercial or non-commercial. If you cut out driver issues, X is on par with or more stable than other systems. It had better be, given that it’s had decades of bug fixes with few new features to cause new bugs.

That, and they might be using Object Pascal. I don’t know (I haven’t touched Pascal in thirty years) but I would not be surprised if there’s some overhead there.

You’re listening to loud asshats and assuming they’re the majority. They’re not.

One day Wayland will reach a tipping point where it will replace X. Until then, most users will just stick with whatever their distro installs. Most people don’t care one way or another.

As for me, I’m probably gonna to stick with X until I have no choice because I actually use the network features that Wayland isn’t replacing. That doesn’t mean I hate Wayland - I’ve never used it - it just means it’s not the best software for me at this time. Most people never do anything with X that Wayland can’t do and won’t notice when it becomes the default.

Naw, we just buy ones where the lattice is diagonal.

In other words, we install X Windows.

His later stuff is quite a bit harder. Alice gets more metal as he ages.

Damn straight. MIT license is where it’s at.

What’s that I hear? It sounds like Grace Hopper cackling from the grave…

Alt-x shell-mode

There you go.

A1: Sure, but why would we want to?

A2: Yes, it’s :q![Enter]emacs[Enter]

It has one. It’s called evil-mode.