trevor (he/they)

That’s not what I mean. Yeah, getting the environment variables are simple enough, but if you simply exec something as the root user, whatever you exec will naturally be looking for configs in /root/.config and not your ~/.config dir, so any configurations to things like your text editor won’t be read.

I don’t think it’s that simple. The challenge is that you need to still behave as if it’s invoked as the user so that the editor uses their configurations instead of simply execing it as root.

I could be wrong though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Rare Canonical W. The only thing I miss from the original sudo is sudoedit, but I’m pretty sure that’s on the Rust implementation’s TODO list.

Yeah. A lot of the extra nice things about Ghostty come from native macOS features. It’s a very different story on Linux, but still a solid terminal emulator there as well.

Ghostty is amazing on macOS. On Linux, it’s basically another GTK terminal emulation with a lot of nice configuration options, but nothing that special.

You can already sort of hack distrobox-like functionality, but the biggest problem with doing so is that there’s no Wayland or X11 server running on macOS, so GUI applications don’t work unless you install something like XQuartz, and even then, it’s a pretty janky experience.

The people complaining that Apple copied a good thing are missing the point. If Apple includes containerization on macOS by default (even if you have to enable it manually), more developers can just target Linux instead of Linux and macOS for certain types of applications (real bash scripts with GNU coreutils instead of the trash that Apple ships, servers, etc.).

Because google doesn’t want you doing anything that they can’t control fun on the host Android system. They did the same thing with crostini on ChromeOS for “security”.

Adopting that attitude toward anything is pretty self-defeating. It’s the same bad argument used against gun regulations in the US: “only misusers will have guns”.

Whether you agree with more or less regulations on anything, the “misusers will just do it anyway” is a bad argument.

Better to just roll over by default then, yeah /s

I beg of you: try something that isn’t going to shove a broken packaging format like Snaps down your throat.

Try Pop!_OS or Linux Mint if you want something like Ubuntu, only not broken.

If my first experience with Linux involved wasting time trying to figure out why the applications I installed appeared to freeze because they take 30-60 seconds to open after installation or updates, randomly didn’t work because of dogshit sandboxing, etc., I probably would have turned away.

Yeah. The FSF is far from perfect as well.

Eh. I don’t really care what the OSI a handful of tech giants in a trenchcoat have to say about the ethics of my licenses.

If someone wants to allow modification, distribution, and usage of your software, in the spirit of open source, but don’t want it to be used by organizations that bomb children, I’d consider that better than an Open Source™️ license.

GPL is more freedom for users and developers. MIT is less freedom for users because it grants more “freedom” for some company to exploit the developer’s labor by taking it to make something proprietary with it.

If you want to use GPL code, pushover licenses are incorrect because they protect the user and developer from this nonsense.

If the other projects are licensed with a GPL, there is no issue doing any of these things (except using them for proprietary purposes later), which is the point. If you licensed your project incorrectly, that isn’t the GPL-licensed project’s fault.

Precisely. The Rust community should stop using pushover licenses.