Comment by IshKebab
2 days ago
No offence but GNU is not an organisation I would associate with health, usability and practical software. Noble effort no doubt. Misguided perhaps.
2 days ago
No offence but GNU is not an organisation I would associate with health, usability and practical software. Noble effort no doubt. Misguided perhaps.
No offence but IshKebab is not a person I would associate with someone who knows anything about health, useable and practical software. No matter how noble their intentions are about criticizing software they’ve never used nor never attempt to use because of unfounded stigmas. Misguided indeed.
Automake, bash, emacs, gnucash, gnuhealth, coreutils, gnupg, gimp, grep, make, etc. are all great pieces of GNU software. Don’t take my word for it, here is a list of all the too-many-to-name gnu software used out in the world extensively:
https://www.gnu.org/manual/blurbs.html
> Automake, bash, emacs, gnucash, gnuhealth, coreutils, gnupg, gimp, grep, make, etc. are all great pieces of GNU software.
Come on now. Gnucash is actually decent and I guess I can't complain about grep or coreutils but are you seriously claiming automake is great? The biggest mess I've even seen.
Make fundamentally can't handle spaces in paths, nor is there a sane way to split a project into multiple Makefiles.
GIMP... where to begin. Probably the name. Fortunately we have Krita now which is far superior.
Bash, wow. This is basically a list of software we've been stuck with for decades and are finally moving to good alternatives.
So you admit that all this software we’ve used for decades and still use. That’s pretty great, practical and useable software to me. Is it perfect software and future proof? No but you’re just looking for ways to support your wild opinion that Gnu software is some how bad or not useful.
2 replies →