3…2…1… and somebody writes a malloc macro that includes the defer.

https://github.com/casey/just is an uncursed make (for task running purposes - it's not a general build system)

How does `just` compare to Task (https://taskfile.dev/)?

Just uses make-like syntax, not yaml, which I view as a huge advantage.

No I'm saying use Makefiles, which work just fine. Mark your targets with PHONY and move on.

You still get bash scripts in the targets, with $ escape hell and weirdness around multiline scripts, ordering & parallelism control headaches, and no support for background services.

The only sane use for Makefiles is running a few simple commands in independent targets, but do you really need make then?

(The argument that "everyone has it installed" is moot to me. I don't.)

I rely on it heavily. Have you tried zram swap?

wasting ram speed, disk speed AND cpu compression cycles? No, thank you. ZRAM is dumbest Linux idea in the past 20 years.

Disk speed? You can use zram on a diskless system. Are you sure you know what it does? (There's also the thing where it may be faster to read data from ram compressed and decompress it in cpu cache than reading it uncompressed, but that obviously depends on the workload.)

ahh sorry. you are right: no disk usage. :)

That may be related, but it's not what happened here. Wildcard-cert and all.

Why is meson's wrapdb never mentioned in these kinds of posts, or even the HN discussion of them?

probably because meson doesn't have a lot of play outside certain ecosystems.

I like wrapdb, but I'd rather have a real package manager.

And then you got some minor detail different from the compiled library and boom, UB because some struct is layed out differently or the calling convention is wrong or you compiled with a different -std or …

Which is exactly why you should leave it to the distros to construct a consistent build environment. If your distro regularly gets this wrong then you do have a problem.

By license sure, it is. But having a look at https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html.en#four-freedoms I kind of doubt it really is.

Freedom 1 is dubiously fulfilled. I can modify it, sure, but I can't modify it when the program runs on my data for me. Freedom 0 isn't fulfilled. I don't have the necessary input data to run the program myself.

(Of course the free software definition wasn't written for today's world, and the clarification below goes somewhat against my argument for Freedom 0. Feel free to pick this apart.)

That's a fair point, but I don't think anyone was stating it's free software. It doesn't need to meet the four freedoms to be open source, just the open source definition.

The list of devices in the highest support category hints at how likely this is. https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Devices

And yeah, you can even buy phones with a non-android linux pre-installed, e.g. from pine64. But they come with all kinds of "for early adopters" warning labels. Deservedly so, in my opinion.

Hope there's a timeline in which banking and corporate apps can run/be enrolled on that. If the current geopolitical mess from the USA isn't a good-enough reason to make it happen, I don't know what is.

Oh thanks for that link, I didn't know about it, pre-ordered!

I seriously wonder if doing the same build twice by two people in two locations wouldn't provide the same benefit and others for less money.

(I might be spoiled by sane reproducible build systems. Maybe F-droid isn't.)

I wonder how meson wraps' story fits with this. They used not to, but now they're throwing everything into a single repository [0]. I wonder about the motivation and how it compares to your project.

0: https://github.com/mesonbuild/wrapdb/tree/master/subprojects