Quoting: EagleDelta

Quoting: kokoko3kstatically linking wouldn't help here, at least not forever.
glibc stands between the kernel and userspace.
So if you don't plan to stay with an outdated kernel forever, a statically linked executable will face the issue sooner or later.
We are talking about a deprecated feature since 16 years, while the new feature replacing it has been available since 2 decades.
Somebody, please, explain me WHY on earth one should still rely on it with a software written today.
This is not a glibc fault.

Good blog post about the problem: https://blog.hiler.eu/win32-the-only-stable-abi/

TL;DR -

* DT_GNU_HASH has been around for 16 years, but has very little documentation associated with it. Especially compared to DT_HASH.
* For those 16 years, it was Glibc who provided the compatibility and overrode the defaults for everyone and there never were any easy-to-spot deprecation warnings.
* The constant changing of libraries in Linux with all disregard for applications targeting them is why for most GameDevs, Win32 is a far more stable ABI to target than anything provided in Linux.

And my personal opinion (from experience) - you are not going to get GameDevs to conform to the "Linux" way or the "Right" way of doing these things. If you want gaming on Linux, we have to go to the GameDevs.

How is it possible that I know more than a easycheat dev when it comes to this particular issue, given that I'm not a dev?
I'm not talking about linking libraries, because you can solve the issue with flatpacks and similar or by just providing the correct ones.
We're talking about a technology old at least 16 years badly required by incompetent developers here.
And there is 16 years old windows software that can be run wothout issues under proton today and is not compatible anymore with windows itself.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: setzer22I'm an Arch user, and have been for quite a long time. But I'm starting to grow increasingly worried about the sustainability of their distro model. Honestly, this obsession with dynamically linking everything and updating as soon as possible is a huge house of cards waiting to fall under its own weight.

Why are we okay with the basic model for Linux dependencies being to have *all* the system's dependencies share the same global namespace, while a bunch of overworked (and often underpaid!) enthusiasts make sure that updates happen in lockstep and nothing breaks. Of course things are going to break randomly during updates! There's not enough people willing to donate their time to QA test all of this.

Keeping all this machinery working sounds like a tremendous amount of work, and for what? So that our things break randomly every now and then? So that we can feel good about "memory reuse" while in practice all software we use is Electron crap that happily spins up a chromium instance per window?

The only seemingly valid argument supporting all of this rube goldberg machinery is that we want system updates to automatically patch our applications when a CVE is detected in a system-wide dependency like glibc. But that's (1) Much less of a concern for desktop Linux, which are rarely open to the wide internet in a way that most common exploits could be achieved, and (2) Sysadmins and anyone deploying software on servers are moving away of this traditional distro model in favor of Docker precisely because distro updates break things and environments are non-reproducible.

Anyway... I won't side with Epic on this because they used a deprecated function long after it was documented as such and that's not good practice, but things that work should keep working after an update, I'm tired of this.

At least now we have Valve carefully curating the system updates on Steam OS, so there's less of an incentive to boot up windows when some game stops launching after an upgrade.

statically linking wouldn't help here, at least not forever.
glibc stands between the kernel and userspace.
So if you don't plan to stay with an outdated kernel forever, a statically linked executable will face the issue sooner or later.
We are talking about a deprecated feature since 16 years, while the new feature replacing it has been available since 2 decades.
Somebody, please, explain me WHY on earth one should still rely on it with a software written today.
This is not a glibc fault.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: dziadulewiczso Feral is doing these endless Warhammer games only now there used to be much more appealing stuff like Mad max, Tomb Raiders and what have you.

If you've made a Windows-only game that you're vaguely interested in having the ability to run on Linux, but not enough to be bothered to do it yourself, why pay Feral to do it when Valve will do it for you for free? Feral are just finishing up existing contracts.

Isn't (wasn't) Feral paying copyright holders to port games instead?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Whitewolfe80

Quoting: kokoko3kThe nice thing for me is that they are still developing for Linux.
Looking forward to more stunning ports from Feral guys.

You ll be waiting a long time they no longer support gaming ports to linux

So time will tell, one can hope!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The nice thing for me is that they are still developing for Linux.
Looking forward to more stunning ports from Feral guys.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: mr-victory

Quoting: https://store.steampowered.com/app/362490/Exanima/SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
MINIMUM:
OS: Windows 7 (32-bit)
Processor: Intel Core i5 or AMD Ryzen 3
Memory: 4 GB RAM
Graphics: Nvidia / AMD / Intel (OpenGL 4.6+)
Storage: 10 GB available space
Sound Card: OpenAL compatible
Additional Notes: Linux / Proton compatible

"Proton Compatible", start of a new trend?

If a game is verified for Steam-Deck or the developer stated it supports Proton, i would expect steam to let it publish Linux/Proton requirements too, because you know, performances are not the same, so hardware (and software: read Proton version) requirements may change too.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: M@GOid

QuoteExanima is a game that does not naturally lend itself well to controller input, some aspects of interaction by necessity remain cursor based,

It still baffles me how some developers trow away market share themselves, by having this narrow view of the gaming market: "A PC game must be mouse and keyboard only". Then they act surprised when someone appears asking for gamepad support. Not to mention other modern stuff they continue to be oblivious about.

Next is complaining about poor low sales, how Valve is a monopoly that don't promote their game enough, while cutting too much their profits, so they will go to the Epic store because is better, etc etc. And them you never heard of them again for some reason...

Yeah, it would be really cool if videogames were a form of art and not just a way to make money.
In that way, artists could decide what is the best way to appreciate their creations, instead of being criticized for not having distorted them.

Unfortunately, we live in a crazy world.

Done with sarcasm, sorry, but out of curiosity, with "some developers" are you refferring also to those who made Exanima, right?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

And the official desktop client still lacks proper ui fractional scaling.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: WorMzyInteresting choice to have firefox baked into the image -- it'll pull in the gtk3 stack () and increase the size of the image considerably (would add ~300MiB to my plasma system). If they just need a basic browser for people to use to navigate to flathub or whatever, konqueror might fill that niche (+~25MiB).

Konqueror is based on webkit, right?
I wonder if there is a browser using chromium web engine (still blink?) using qt5.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: g000h

Quoting: nocriAccording to the trend line in the plot, linux will hit 50% of the market share sometime in June of 2500. I need to make memo for my grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand children to check this out :)

Heh. I did a similar calculation a year or two ago, regarding the length of time before the Earth became completely broken and not habitable and it is shorter than that, i.e. 300 years.

I'm guessing your calculation is based on linear growth, rather than exponential (or other) mathematical model?

We have to ask liam how is the trend.

View this comment - View article - View full comments