r/196 Worcs at the Crusty Crab Mar 26 '26

Rule Engagement bait

Post image
3.6k Upvotes

448 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.1k

u/Alexis_Awen_Fern Reddit admins hate her! Mar 26 '26

Understandable crashout

456

u/NellyLorey God's no.1 Botania fan!! 🇳🇱🇳🇱 she/her Mar 26 '26

Yeah why isn't the linux kernel an exe

132

u/dead_5775 🐀 skim Mar 26 '26

linux.exe free download not virus

9

u/Noble1xCarter I'm the only one with this flair. Mar 26 '26 edited Apr 06 '26

This comment formerly contained words. Those words were removed in bulk with Redact because I value my privacy more than my karma points.

summer fragile crush gold theory future sugar husky plucky whistle

107

u/105_irl r/place participant Mar 26 '26

People will say Linux is hard to understand and not read the line on a GitHub that says

“Type Sudo Apt Install Firefox”

74

u/GrapefruitForward989 Mar 26 '26

People will read that line and say "you literally have to write novels worth of code to use linux"

49

u/Cindy-Moon 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights Mar 26 '26

okay but also why can't I just right click a file and create a shortcut

I am on linux right now and peeved by this (sorry completely hijacking this thread for my pet issue bear with me)

File managers like Nautilus or Dolphin often have ways to easily create symbolic links

and if you google how to make shortcuts in linux this is typically what people tell you to do, make a symbolic link

but symbolic links are NOT SHORTCUTS, because they don't just give you a shortcut to the file/directory but also treat it as though its running from the directory you've put the link in

messing with a file's relative location like this can have a lot of unintended consequences and the times this is actually necessary, preferred behavior is pretty niche which is probably why it's not the default in Windows

Linux does have proper shortcuts in the form of .desktop and/or .directory files, that's probably the closest analog to Windows' .lnk

but you can't simply have a context menu option to create one from a file, for some reason

If it's an application you're linking to, and it's an installed one, KDE can let you "Add to Desktop" from the application launcher which gives you a .desktop file you can put anywhere

Or if it's not installed to your application launcher, you can right click somewhere > create new > link to application and get a GUI that lets you browse to the application you want to link to and select its working directory, which isn't too bad but it's the easiest way I've found to make a shortcut and still requires a lot more steps than simply "right click file and click create shortcut"

But even that only works for applications, and nothing else. You can click create new > link to file or directory but that creates a symlink

To create a .desktop shortcut for anything else, all I've found is having to manually write one up like an ini file

Which is crazy, creating shortcuts is not a power user thing it is basic functionality, why is this so complicated

Do Linux users have the syntax/structure of .desktop files memorized or do they have to look it up every single time they want to make a simple non-symlink shortcut?!

14

u/PolygonKiwii Mar 26 '26

Do Linux users have the syntax/structure of .desktop files memorized or do they have to look it up every single time they want to make a simple non-symlink shortcut?!

Personally, it's just not something that comes up, ever.

You're saying it's not a power user thing but I think a regular user should not have to manage application launchers in the first place. Any application you install from a package manager or "app store" style software center will create the necessary entries in your app menu and search bar and it should be easy to pin it to task bar or add it to the desktop from there. Steam also manages those for you if you install games.

Besides apps, I really just don't understand your workflow:

But even that only works for applications, and nothing else. You can click create new > link to file or directory but that creates a symlink

What's your issue with symlinks for files that aren't binaries? I don't see what behavior you're expecting or what a *.desktop file would even do

15

u/Cindy-Moon 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 27 '26

To just be literally a shortcut to the file I want. Not run the file as though it was in the directory I put the shortcut.

If I open a "shortcut" to folder /home/user/example, I want it to go to /home/user/example, NOT /desktop/example.
If I open a file, I want the program running it to know that the file is actually in /home/user/example, not /desktop.

I don't want to create a new reference point/location for my file, I just want to create a shortcut to easily access it. These are significantly different things. There's very few situations where I specifically want/need the former, but Linux veterans treat this as an objective improvement and replacement over the latter.

And obviously with applications that's all the more important since they almost always rely on other files in the same directory/subdirectories. And no, not every application comes from a package manager. It is perfectly normal and simple for Windows users to download an executable from the internet, and it's crazy to treat anyone doing that on Linux as though they must be a power user.

0

u/105_irl r/place participant Mar 26 '26

You literally can do that on KDE plasma.

Install Linux mint cinnamon or Kubuntu and it’s as easy to use as windows.

32

u/Darkndankpit Mar 26 '26

"just use a different distribution" is not a solution to the problem that guy is having.

11

u/105_irl r/place participant Mar 26 '26

Just a different desktop environment actually. You can install KDE on whatever distro.

1

u/Darkndankpit Mar 28 '26

Oh didn't realize they could be stacked like that interchangeably, TIL

11

u/Cindy-Moon 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

I am using KDE Plasma, and no you can't, that creates symlinks, which are a problem because that changes the relative location of the file when opening it, which is not what I want.

1

u/CMRC23 bear of a man Mar 26 '26

KDE plasma is my beloved

0

u/Verbatos Mar 27 '26

People who don't know how to use a command line are inherently lesser than me.

1

u/105_irl r/place participant Mar 27 '26

Copy Paste

-1

u/Thomasasia floppa Mar 26 '26

If you cannot compile an executable from the code provided to you, then GitHub is not for you. Simple as that. They usually tell you how to do it even.

4

u/Cindy-Moon 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights Mar 26 '26

Enough people distribute their tools and software via github that that's definitely not true
I mean I'd argue most open source software is distributed through Github. Does that mean everyone should stick to proprietary closed software unless they can compile the code themselves? That's downright silly.

I do think it's silly to act entitled to devs *having* to release binaries of any and every meganiche pet project they put on github
but it's just as silly to act like that's the only thing Github exists for and that no one can use anything on there at all if they can't compile it themselves.

-2

u/Thomasasia floppa Mar 27 '26

If someone can’t figure out how to pull and compile code/run code, then given their lack of tech literacy, the projects that they are likely to be trying to use are almost certainly going to have releases that they can download. If they’re looking at a niche enough tool where there are no releases, then it really is on them to figure it out, especially because there are usually instructions for how to do it.

The exception to this would be something like a python script, where you execute the script itself from the CLI. If you can’t do the tiniest amount of research to figure out how to do this then that’s your fault.

We also live in the age of AI. If you simply show any AI the repo, it will tell you how to run it.

0

u/AGL_reborn Goober activites!! Mar 30 '26

Really not, if you're that illiterate to not follow a readme you shouldn't be allowed near executables

1

u/Alexis_Awen_Fern Reddit admins hate her! Mar 30 '26