[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX
From: |
indieterminacy |
Subject: |
Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Jun 2021 23:18:11 +0000 |
There are many bawdy jokes Id like to make concerning that citation.
June 25, 2021 10:56 PM, jbranso@dismail.de wrote:
> That and their software is top notch! Linus called their developers
> "masturbating monkeys", because of their obsessive pursuit of security!
> hahaha. At every shutdown, the OpenBSD kernel is re-linked. It's the same
> kernel when you reboot it, but the binary is re-ordered. That's amazing!
Yes, they are highly capable and ambitious.
I picked up that information, having researched Hyperbola... based upon your
prompt.
>> Additionally, while I understand that MIT is in many ways deficient
>> compared to GPL licenses, if not pernicious and counterproductive I do
>> empathise regarding why networking engineers may prefer having a licence
>> which permits encapsulation more readily.
>
> Well, what is interesting, is that the HyperbolaBSD developers intend to
> rewrite 20% of the BSD kernel and license the whole project GPL. :)
>
> My personal feeling is that GNU should adopt Org mode as their documentation
> standard. It's slightly easier to use than texinfo. Thought texinfo is
> pretty rad. :)
I love Latex, Context, I feel a bit weird for not having dabbled with Texinfo.
Im not sure Texinfo is going to sway enough younger programmers (Im neither
young nor old), I fear too many have been malconditioned into accepting delible
communication techniques - Texinfo may no longer cut it.
I would consider Org mode to probably be the most acceptable default, though in
many respects Skribilo could be more of a purer expression of a complete Guix
approach. Are the aforementioned all different ways of dissuading people from
considering Guix or documenting for it?
FYI, I have been wading into the Gemini protocol the last two months. Beyond
its more noticable security and publishing advantages, I have been entranced by
the terseness of its Gem .gmi (minimalist MarkDown) format. I consider it has
crossover appeal (as least between documenting power users across OSes). FYI,
the OpenBSD crowd seem to have the lead in the Gemini space - but this is
presumable for the protocol rather than the markdown.
Since then I stopped annotating in Orgmode and will be building workflows to
(eventually?) approximate a lot of Orgmode functionality. Obviously Orgmode is
awesome but I wonder if it is too designed around individual workflows and
procedures - where greater payoff comes from pooled workflows and procedures.
I had success/pleaseure converting from .gem to .org formats with this
experimentation (concerning annotations for a Guix CWL blog post)
=> https://git.sr.ht/~indieterminacy/q1q20hqh_kq_oq_parsing_gem_zsh/tree
>From the tree you can see that it is feasible to output to *tex* or *html*
>formats, using simple REGEX foo.
Additionally there is an unfinished attempt at exporting to (sic) Skribilo.
(You may want to ignore the potentially impenitrable annotations, which
concerns a 'Recursive Modelling Language' Ive been working on - it would
certainly confuse this topic)
I would be happy if Guix writing was done with minimal Gem markup but with
heavy Lisp usage for interpretation, synthesis, collection and publishing of
content. I had originally taken the approach that there should be Tex heavy
markup first and then simplified transposing into other formats later. Now Im
on the other end of the horseshoe.
I miss experimenting with regards to Tikz as a mechanism for generating
graphics. I understand why other tools are used and ho programmers tend to
seemingly think in terms of characters. It bothers me that I do not have
beautiful graph displays representing my environment - to consider things from
an impressionistic viewpoint and a contrast to text-editor/browser dualism. I
suspect it isnt insurmountable and could allow visually minded people to not
feel aggrieved by TUIscapes.
> What do you mean by:
>
>> empathise regarding why networking engineers may prefer having a licence
>> which permits encapsulation more readily.
I mean: the MIT license allows you to operate in a commercial setting, whereby
only the binaries are provided, without the requirement to provide the source
content. While I normally am against this, an OpenBSD networking head has
explained to me how there would be usecases where this would be useful - if
only to provide the commercial breathing space for niche projects. I probably
should stop paraphrasing this person now.
Jonathan McHugh
indieterminacy@libre.brussels
- package manager guix on Windows and OSX, Patricio MartÃnez, 2021/06/24
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX, jbranso, 2021/06/24
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX, Edouard Klein, 2021/06/25
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX, Joshua Branson, 2021/06/25
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX, Jonathan McHugh, 2021/06/25
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX, jbranso, 2021/06/25
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX,
indieterminacy <=
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX, jbranso, 2021/06/25
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX, indieterminacy, 2021/06/26
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX, Edouard Klein, 2021/06/27
- Re: package manager guix on Windows and OSX, maxxcan, 2021/06/28