tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-666433472318885436.post3724708134206997177..comments2024-03-28T02:18:19.187-07:00Comments on Triberius' Gaming Journal: Non-mainstream OS development.....Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05609954231241036195noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-666433472318885436.post-2666844367700568352012-04-19T21:51:46.893-07:002012-04-19T21:51:46.893-07:00"No Commercial game developer is going to rel..."No Commercial game developer is going to release the source to a client or entire game to a Distro maintainer to package ever.. This is why I'd like to see a universal installer format for Linux so that developers can create click to install packages."<br /><br />I think you missunderstand.<br /><br />There are two types of apps: those binding to local libraries and those bringing their own.<br /><br />Because distributions vary in what libraries they bring in, with what versions and what config flags - it will be impossible job to include all distributions, or "ultimate format" as you mean it.<br /><br />Those bringing their own (including statically linked), don´t have to rely on anything other than kernel and maybe xorg. However, the negative side is that you HAVE to keep an eye on vulnerabilities in the wild and update your software.<br /><br />Thats it - archive with few instructions where to place files. This is essentually "package manager".<br />For variant (a), there is complication to require specific versions of libraries, dependence and conflict checking. This is near impossible to achieve for every distribution. Unless software is opensource. This is for any OS. In opposite case, you might have luck with ABI consistency though, or not. This is for example the case some windows titles stop running out of the sudden.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-666433472318885436.post-20808780627703714852012-04-03T06:22:28.002-07:002012-04-03T06:22:28.002-07:00Packages? They are not needed. You are talking to ...Packages? They are not needed. You are talking to "kernel". Packages are needed if you want to optimize precisely for library versions/config in the system. There you need SOURCE. Packaging is ALWAYS done by distro maintainers and is NOT hard. There is no problem. So "universal installer" is NOT needed, because it would be "7z" or "xz" archive.<br /><br />No Commercial game developer is going to release the source to a client or entire game to a Distro maintainer to package ever.. This is why I'd like to see a universal installer format for Linux so that developers can create click to install packages.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05609954231241036195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-666433472318885436.post-79013281167202864792012-04-02T22:08:09.634-07:002012-04-02T22:08:09.634-07:00"OSX is more secure than Windows"
It is...."OSX is more secure than Windows"<br />It is. As long as you don´t install anything or run anything from untrusted sources, it is rock solid. This is difference between Mac and Linux, Linux is for major part opensource - so there is no trust involved, but pure facts of security.<br /><br />"For example Safari is less secure than IE or Firefox."<br />I don´t know for toolkit part, but on web-front, it uses KHTML aka Webkit, which is used by Chrome, Konqueror and many others. Safari is miles more secure than exploder and on par to firefox.<br /><br />"Anyone remember Macdefender?"<br />Installed itself as disguise. Many other Mac malwares were contained in "pirated" software. This path isn´t different from windows.<br /><br />"The real truth is any OS is only as secure as the habits of the user"<br />True for linux and mac. Wrong for windows, as 60% of windows infections is drive-by or auto-install. There is no such part on linux or mac. As for protections - worst case AV(defender), no noexecute bit of files, really wierd ACLs, bad UAC(sudo wannabe). Windows is simply cheese.<br /><br />"I'm leaving out the minimalistic Distros like Puppy since they aren't suited for graphically intense gaming."<br />They are.<br /><br />"How do you shift resources to support half a dozen file structures, desktop configurations, libraries etc on top of needing to release 4-5 different installer packages to support them all. You have .deb .run, .rpm, and lesser known one's like SuperDeb, LZM and PISI."<br />The file structures or desktop configurations you are talking and completely irrelevant and unrelated. Solely and completely irrelevant.<br /><br />It is as if claiming windows is not suited for gaming (or viruses), due to massive amount of software it has.<br /><br />For gaming you need just library stack. OpenGL, SDL, Gstreamer. And standartification - Freedesktop. Everything is in place.<br /><br />Packages? They are not needed. You are talking to "kernel". Packages are needed if you want to optimize precisely for library versions/config in the system. There you need SOURCE. Packaging is ALWAYS done by distro maintainers and is NOT hard. There is no problem. So "universal installer" is NOT needed, because it would be "7z" or "xz" archive.<br /><br />"~10% and Linux around ~1%."<br />According to humble indie bundle statistics, it is 20% and 20% percent accordingly. This is about gaming scene.<br /><br />Best regards.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com