Quoting: LoftyIm trying out EmulationStation Desktop right now instead of vanilla retroarch, the one issue im having is that i can't directly exit a game back to ES ? The idea is to click the analogs down at the same time i believe but this does nothing. i can press the home key on my 8bitdopro2 and bring retroarch menu up though and then manually exit the game then retro arch.. seems clunky.

is there a way to bring up some sort of ES UI and exit directly back ? i did do some searching but didn't find anything other than the aforementioned analogue clicks.

It is clunky, but is actually just how the Playstation works... always irritated me.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: const

Quoting: legluondunet

Quoting: Linuxer

Quoting: Cyril

Quoting: LinuxerAww there is no snap for it or a flatpak

An AppImage is not good for you I assume?
I installed it from the AUR on my side.

downloaded it now but it didnt open when clicking for some reason appimages never worked forme

Appimage are made to greatly facilitate Linux users desktop experience, how it is possible this do not work for you? Do you use an exotic Linux Distribution with minimal libraries installed? i just tested emulationstation-de appimage and it just work (after a little chmod +x command).

I'd highly advise to use appimagelauncher, should be in most distributions community repos and does a great job with handling appimages (semi installing them, creating shortcuts...)

The main appimage I use is Cura (as repositories generally don't have the latest, and it pesters to upgrade every time it launches). Would be nice if appimages had a more integrated way to manage new versions, etc, like Flatpak does.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Speaking of thumbnails, a very useful plugin is stl-thumb! If you have a 3D printer, it's very nice to have the models show up in Nautilus. Especially when you've bought large collections of stuff that you have to build in pieces.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TuxeeI know. Red Hat. With their NIH syndrome. Painful. They didn't want to contribute to upstart. They had to dish out systemd. How lame. They didn't want to support Unity, no they had to had it their way and concoct Gnome Shell. They could have supported Snap, but no, it had to be flatpak. Because all the Canonical alternatives preceded the Red Hat implementations. Mir was a different beast altogether - Canoncial actually wanted to use Wayland, but Wayland was years from being usable and then Mir served a different purpose.

Now I know this is a troll... but the only one of those that is accurate is upstart. Gnome Shell was around much longer than Ubuntu / Unity, in fact, Unity was a 'we don't like Gnome Shell, but are going to use the Gnome Libraries to make our own thing... that's really close to what Gnome Shell is anyhow' Literally upstart, which was a partial implementation of anything, and didn't cover a lot of use cases, is the only thing Ubuntu did really that wasn't in direct competition first. (By the way, Wayland is still a few years away from being truly usable, and Mir was ditched).

Quoting: TuxeeOh puhleeze. The usual BS. This has been the mantra for at least the last 15 years (because that's how long I use Linux on my desktop). The availability of commercial software has never been hindered by "having two or three package formats". Never. I do have my (paid-for) commercial products as DEBs, AppImages, Flatpaks, Tars, script installers. So if companies want to sell their stuff they are perfectly capable and willing to do so.

Yeah, and I've been using Linux for 25. And? Right, they are perfectly capable of doing it. But look at complaints from different developers... hell Valve switched SteamOS from Debian to Arch because some of them hated packaging things for Debian. I don't know about you, but I've talked to many developers over the years, and one of the things they've always hated about trying to create software for Linux is how many different installation methods are there.

Many years ago, you'd mostly see on forums things like 'if you don't know how to do ./configupre; make; make install, then you can GTFO'. I can guarantee you that there have been and will continue to be developers that don't want to deal with that crap, so simply don't release software for Linux.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: slaapliedjeI bet you if there could be alt stores to snap, no one would hate it as much as they do.

Well that is the situation today but people still hate it as much as they do. Now there AFAIK does not yet exist such a store, but there _could_ do since everything needed to build it is available, it's just that no one have bothered and that is hardly Canonical:s fault.

I'd like to be proven wrong, but I'm pretty sure their backend is tied very much into their client.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PikoloIf they do this, I'll have to change my mount points and backup procedures :(
I store my Steam games on a second drive. It's mounted on /opt, but in my experience snaps can't access stuff outside of /home unless installed in classic mode. I don't particularly want to change my mount to within /home - /home gets backed up, while the games shouldn't be

I use Deja Dup Backup, and it has in it's preferences the directories you don't want backed up.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: slaapliedjeEvery corporation has an agenda... to make money. Canonical's best way to make money is to try to get as much vendor lock-in that they can, without pissing off the community enough that someone switches to a different distro. Snap and them being the only ones who can host a snap store is their method of lock-in.

That's just nonsense. Canonical make zero money from desktop Ubuntu users. They make money, like Red Hat/IBM do, by offering paid support and services. Snaps make that hugely easier for their actual customers, and for themselves as maintainers. They might also have made money from the Ubuntu Phone, which snaps were largely created for, but they ran out of money before that could become a thing.

Snaps only come from one place to solve the discovery issue that PPAs have, and which Fedora users experience from flatpaks where they have access to some flatpaks but not all of them. All the snaps are available in one place - accessible by default for Ubuntu users and trivial to add for users of other distros (except Mint, who put up additional barriers in the way of user choice).

They've opened up their support stuff to desktop users, so them making zero money from that would kind of imply that was a bad decision, no?

I personally haven't seen other flatpak 'stores' outside of flathub, but it's still open, and vendors can put a link on their page to add theirs. Pretty simple. The problem with Canonical being the only ones who can curate the snap store is that they don't have the man power like Apple does to make sure malware doesn't slip in, like has already happened at one point.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TuxeeCanonical makes money with support and services for commercial customers. Exactly like Red Hat. Their Steam efforts are just pursued to keep Ubuntu visible as "the" desktop distro that plays well with their customer services. And there is zero lock-in since pretty much every software I can think of is also available via other channels. Snap is a convenient (YMMV) alternative in the Ubuntu ecosystem. That's all.

That would be great if it were true, as some software is out there that make snaps available, but otherwise have to be installed via tar balls, or converting rpms, etc. It's a visibility issue. I bet you if there could be alt stores to snap, no one would hate it as much as they do. Ubuntu is like the Apple of the Linux world, or at least they'd like to be.

The difference between them and Red Hat is that Red Hat pays developers to put most of that code back into open source projects and pushes forth the advancement in Linux in ways that Ubuntu have either tried to do their own thing with (mir, Unity, snap) or just minor things that do actually help (gnome performance improvements). The scale difference of how much Red hat improves Linux as a whole vs how much Ubuntu does is kind of staggering.

For myself (and others), Ubuntu would need to do a lot to regain our trust. All the snap vs flatpak does is cause developers to keep shying away from deploying commercial software on Linux (and as much as we as users can disagree on how much we want commercial software, for 'The year of the Linux Desktop' to happen, we need it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Tuxee

Quoting: sudoerWell done corp world... a container in a container. Unneccessary complexity for the sake of corp agendas. Does Proton even work with this.

What "agenda"?

Every corporation has an agenda... to make money. Canonical's best way to make money is to try to get as much vendor lock-in that they can, without pissing off the community enough that someone switches to a different distro. Snap and them being the only ones who can host a snap store is their method of lock-in.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Been meaning to replay Bloodrayne!

View this comment - View article - View full comments