The Still New What Did You Last Do Thread

[Cacodemon345]

They still fear shipping the compiler runtime and VC++ libraries (the part that typical Win32 programs need) with Windows because they feel that doing so would get them slapped with anti-trust lawsuits/fines again.

Meanwhile Linux and macOS ships with those being part of the system by default. Go figure why Apple and Red Hat didn't get slapped with anti-trust lawsuits/fines regarding those...

[yum13241]

Also, 'insanity' depends on the use case. For some stuff you cannot even risk the remote chance that there's some breakage in glibc and rather link statically instead.

Most likely, you're a government in that case.

[Marisa the Magician]

Well, there has been some glibc breakage recently, for sure. Some change in it made Tim Allen Doom no longer work.

[Graf Zahl]

They still fear shipping the compiler runtime and VC++ libraries (the part that typical Win32 programs need) with Windows because they feel that doing so would get them slapped with anti-trust lawsuits/fines again.

Now that is utter hogwash. If that was the case they wouldn't have made part of the CRT a system library at all.

[Chris]

Debian Sid != Debian Unstable

https://www.debian.org/releases/sid/

The unstable distribution ("sid")

The code name for Debian's development distribution is "sid", aliased to "unstable". Most of the development work that is done in Debian, is uploaded to this distribution.

They are the same.

They still fear shipping the compiler runtime and VC++ libraries (the part that typical Win32 programs need) with Windows because they feel that doing so would get them slapped with anti-trust lawsuits/fines again.

Meanwhile Linux and macOS ships with those being part of the system by default. Go figure why Apple and Red Hat didn't get slapped with anti-trust lawsuits/fines regarding those...

What got Microsoft slapped was largely the way it tied Internet Exploder to Windows and had it installed by default, and would get in the way of letting people use alternatives, giving themselves an unfair advantage in the web browser market through their dominance of the OS market, unfairly harming competition from the likes of Netscape Navigator, Opera, Firefox, etc. I think what they tried to pull with Java also played a role. Considering how critical a C/C++ runtime is for a modern OS, you couldn't get away without one. As long as Windows doesn't get in the way of apps using alternative runtimes (which they don't; MinGW uses a port of libstdc++ instead of the VC++ runtimes, and only uses the ancient msvcrt.dll to avoid making a full port of glibc, though they do offer an option for a different implementation of a select number of functions to give better C99 or glibc compatibility), there's no problem there.

But even if that was the case, Apple and Red Hat don't hold anywhere near as much control in the OS market to make such tie-ins unfair for competing C/C++ runtimes.

[Graf Zahl]

But even if that was the case, Apple and Red Hat don't hold anywhere near as much control in the OS market to make such tie-ins unfair for competing C/C++ runtimes.

Apple does on Mobile, though, and their always lagging browser support in Safari can be truly aggravating - and unlike Windows Apple does not allow any alternative whatsoever.
And they seem to get away with it

[Chris]

Apple does on Mobile, though, and their always lagging browser support in Safari can be truly aggravating - and unlike Windows Apple does not allow any alternative whatsoever.
And they seem to get away with it

I don't disagree. Although I can also see that as Apple/Safari being the last true hold-out from total Chrome domination of the web. Edge and the like are based on Chrome/Blink, so are still beholden to Google and what they decide to do for the web. Firefox's market share is all but evaporated, and they're financially dependent on Google's funding so aren't going to be pushing against them or become a real threat. If websites didn't have to bother with supporting Safari and could assume an iPhone/iPad user would get a real version of Chrome or Chromium, then Chrome or some Chrome-reskin would be your only real option for using the web.

[Cacodemon345]

They still fear shipping the compiler runtime and VC++ libraries (the part that typical Win32 programs need) with Windows because they feel that doing so would get them slapped with anti-trust lawsuits/fines again.

Now that is utter hogwash. If that was the case they wouldn't have made part of the CRT a system library at all.

They do have an obsession otherwise with keeping interfaces of their libraries both forwards and backwards-compatible which would explain forced compiler runtimes.

[yum13241]

Apple's browser (and by extension, device situation) sucks, but one of my relatives recommended an iPhone to one of my other relatives "cause it's cheap". Uhh, I'm not dealing with that SHIT, thanks. (I'm the family IT guy)

The monopoly Google has on the WWW sucks.

They do have an obsession otherwise with keeping interfaces of their libraries both forwards and backwards-compatible which would explain forced compiler runtimes.

Then every developer (Graf included) should drop support for everything but the latest tech if that's bad.

Well, there has been some glibc breakage recently, for sure. Some change in it made Tim Allen Doom no longer work.

LMG: They were relying on 1 or more of the following:

1. Undefined behavior.
2. A deprecated function/flag/whatever
3. A hack.
4. Some weird thing I can't think of rn.
5. I'm wrong.


Also, what the hell does GLIBC have to do with this? Unless it's its own sourceport then it shouldn't access C(++) directly. It should be abstracted away with smth like ZScript or VavoomC.

[Graf Zahl]

Apple does on Mobile, though, and their always lagging browser support in Safari can be truly aggravating - and unlike Windows Apple does not allow any alternative whatsoever.
And they seem to get away with it

I don't disagree. Although I can also see that as Apple/Safari being the last true hold-out from total Chrome domination of the web. Edge and the like are based on Chrome/Blink, so are still beholden to Google and what they decide to do for the web. Firefox's market share is all but evaporated, and they're financially dependent on Google's funding so aren't going to be pushing against them or become a real threat. If websites didn't have to bother with supporting Safari and could assume an iPhone/iPad user would get a real version of Chrome or Chromium, then Chrome or some Chrome-reskin would be your only real option for using the web.

Kf Apple wasn't Apple and didn't consistently release a sub-par product that might be true, but in its current state Safari is more an obstacle than an asset, because unlike Google, Apple DOES have a monopoly on their devices and with that can do a lot of damage.

[yum13241]

Kf Apple wasn't Apple and didn't consistently release a sub-par product that might be true, but in its current state Safari is more an obstacle than an asset, because unlike Google, Apple DOES have a monopoly on their devices and with that can do a lot of damage.

Firefox ftw. I wrote this from it, and a lot of other posts too. Safari does live up to its name, an anti-Safari of features and extensions that is. (where's my uBlock Origin)

[Graf Zahl]

I also stick with Firefox. If I had to switch I'd choose some Chromium-based browser free of Google or Microsoft but surely not the mainstream ones.

[yum13241]

I also stick with Firefox. If I had to switch I'd choose some Chromium-based browser free of Google or Microsoft but surely not the mainstream ones.

Maybe ungoogled-chromium?

[wildweasel]

Vivaldi was doing pretty well for me for a while as a Chromium-based browser. I only switched to Firefox because I wanted a more consistent sync system between my desktops and mobile (and mobile Firefox supports uBlock Origin).

[yum13241]

Vivaldi has a lot of features (some would see it as bloat), unfortunately it's not fully free software and it was very slow after a while.