• heartlessevil@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Lennart has always been a joke. Forced systems on us and wrote the disaster of pulseaudio.

      • monk@lemmy.unboiled.info
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Linux community is so inherently meritocratic that one can’t meaninfully force anything upon any large group of them.

        Thore particular two creations of Lennart took the world by storm precisely because they were so absurdly good that working on other stuff was a dead-end, obvious for all but such tiny fraction of people that even forming vacuous hate bubbles haven’t rallied enough effort to foster and maintain alternatives.

        It became trendy to hate Pulseaudio and call it bloat years after Nokia shipped a rather anemic phone where it already worked flawlessly. I need no further proof that there’s no technical basis beneath the hate.

        • michaelrose@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Linux community is so inherently meritocratic that one can’t meaningfully force anything upon any large group of them.

          Even for developers, there is a very substantial cost to any deviation from the herd and little time or money for these projects. Factually a handful of companies run the Linux userspace and a handful of people run those companies.

          You can go your own way but existing market share and resources matter more than quality or merit.

          • monk@lemmy.unboiled.info
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            As a Red Hat employee who had his all-around sensible Fedora Change to prevent it from falling too far behind RHEL (!) rejected, I think I can confidently claim that your statements smell of conspiracy theories.

            Do Linux-involved companies have resources to develop the projects they like the most? Yes. Do companies dominate userspace development? I don’t think so, in fact, they’re all seem quite focused in their interests, and their involvement with a median package on your community distro desktop system isn’t even minimal, it’s none. Do the se companies at least all push for a united agenda? Absolutely not. Can they force a single random community distro like Debian to pick something over something else? No. 99% of the distros? Goes without saying.

            • michaelrose@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              It’s not a conspiracy theory to imagine that IBM’s vision for Linux compared to 2000s or 2010s era Linux is opaque, complicated, and enterprisey. It’s who they are.

              The grandparent comment

              Linux community is so inherently meritocratic that one can’t meaningfully force anything upon any large group of them.

              Is pure fantasy. Software projects are dictatorships of those willing to put in the work, not meritocracies. There is nothing immoral or wrong about this but we should be realists. The entire software ecosystem is dominated by oft shitty good enough solutions which people poured enough work into to solve problems well enough.

      • heartlessevil@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        After being a pile of crap forced on us by a corporate giant for many many years. Make no mistake, they are doing embrace extend extinguish just like Microsoft.

    • 2xsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I use Pipewire now but Pulseaudio is (and has been for years) better than both the Windows and Mac audio stack. It may have been bad once (yes, I remember the days of having to start Wine with some pulse env var so the audio doesn’t crackle) but nowadays it doesn’t deserve the level of hate it still gets.

      • gens@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        It would have been fine if it wasn’t forced. “We are the audio stack everyone should use” but when it doesn’t work then it’s an ALSA bug and alsa ppl should take the blame (even when it works fine with full alsa, like my audio card). And it was designed more like a networking stack then an audio stack.

        Sure it was necessary at the time (so that hdmi, and later bluetooth, would work transparently), but the “i know best” attitude hurt its execution.

        SystemD on the other hand brought nothing of value. Did way more harm then good.

        • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          when it doesn’t work then it’s an ALSA bug and alsa ppl should take the blame (even when it works fine with full alsa, like my audio card).

          Well, yeah. PA used ALSA APIs that most applications didn’t, which exposed bugs in little-used, little-tested driver code. Nothing implausible about that.

          The standard AC97 and USB audio drivers worked fine—I know they did because that’s what I was using with PA at the time—but the drivers for more esoteric audio hardware had yet to be debugged, and Lennart couldn’t feasibly test and fix all of them by himself because he didn’t have the hardware. Others in the community did, and together they fixed the bugs and eventually got PA working smoothly on everything.

          And it was designed more like a networking stack then an audio stack.

          Of course. PA was specifically designed to be network transparent, same as the X11 protocol it was typically used with.

          Sure it was necessary at the time (so that hdmi, and later bluetooth, would work transparently), but the “i know best” attitude hurt its execution.

          Ah, but he was correct. He did, in fact, know best. Lennart Poettering brought an end to the clusterf*** that was Linux audio pre-PA. No one else solved the problem until he came along and said “no more,” and I must say I’m appalled at the ingratitude of his detractors.

          SystemD on the other hand brought nothing of value. Did way more harm then good.

          Nonsense! Before systemd, startup took forever, shutdown took forever, and it was a crapshoot whether shutdown would succeed or hang. Systemd hasn’t fully solved this problem, but it’s a lot better than what I had to live with in the bad old days.

          Also, systemd brings with it a logging system with integrity checking, structured data, and database-like querying. Huge improvement over BSD syslog.

          Also also, systemd has proper process supervision, services can depend on devices, unit/global start/stop timeouts, networkd, user session tracking and cleanup, user services, easy-to-use sandboxing, and on and on and on. There’s all kinds of useful goodies in there.

        • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Quit your bullshit, nothing was ever forced on you. This is Linux, free software and all that, if you’re not happy then use a systemd-less distro and stop complaining about meaningless points. SystemD works very well for me (and the vast majority of the Linux community) and is very easy to use and understand

          • gens@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Udev was changed to depend on systemd. No good reason for it. So it practically was forced. You can lie all you want, it won’t change reality. SystemD was hyped up by comparing it with the worst implementation of sysV, at a time when no major distro other then fedora even used sysV. And that is not even the tip of the pile of dishonesty.

            Just by saying that it is no better then alternatives of the time will get ignorant people like you to yell. That is how strong the hype was around it. How can you even talk about free software when RH can take a core component and make it hard dependant on whatever they want. Just like bluetooth has a hard dependency on PA. I’m also free to say something sucks, just like you are free to lick their balls.