this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2024
3 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

48323 readers
651 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As a advid user of lightburn for my business, this truely saddens me.

I loved being able to have the freedom to run linux and have 1st class support.

Lightburn states in this post, about how linux is less than 1℅ of there users. They also state it costs lots of money and time to develop for each distribution. To which i gotta ask WHY not just make a flatpak or distribute source to let the community package it. Like its kinda dumb to kill it off ive been using zoronOS for 3 years running my laser cutter! And it works bloody great!!!! The last version for linux will be 1.7 which will continue to work forever with a valid liscence. I do not plan to switch back to ~~windows~~ spyware or ~~MAC~~ overpriced Unix. I hope the people at lightburn reconsider in the future, There software is the best software for laser cutters period. And when buying my laser cutter (60watt omtech) i went out of my way to buy one with a rudia controller as it is compatible with lightburn.

--edit just got the email this is what they sent

"To our valued Linux users:

After a great deal of internal discussion, we have made the difficult decision to sunset Linux support following the upcoming release of LightBurn 1.7.00.

Many of us at LightBurn are Linux users ourselves, and this decision was made reluctantly, after careful investigation of all possible avenues for continuing Linux support.

The unfortunate reality is that Linux users make up only 1% of our overall user base, but providing and supporting Linux-compatible builds takes up as much or more time as does providing them for Windows and Mac OS.

The segmentation of Linux distributions complicates these burdens further — we've had to provide three separate packages for the versions of Linux we officially support, and still encounter frequent compatibility issues on those distributions (or closely related distributions), to say nothing of the many distributions we have been asked to support.

Finally, we will soon begin building LightBurn on a new framework that will require our development team to write custom libraries for each platform we support. This will be a significant undertaking and, regrettably, it is simply not tenable to invest our team's time into an effort that will impact such a small portion of our user base. Such challenges will only continue to arise as we work to expand LightBurn's capabilities going forward.

We understand that our Linux users will be disappointed by this decision. We appreciate all of our users, and assure you that your existing license will still work with any version of LightBurn for which your license term is valid, up until LightBurn version 1.7.00, forever. Prior releases will always be made available for download. Finally, your license will continue to be valid for future Windows and Mac OS releases covered by your license term.

If you are a Linux-only user who has recently purchased a license or renewal that is valid for a release of LightBurn after v1.7.00, please contact us for a refund.

Rest assured that we will be using the time gained by sunsetting Linux support to redouble our efforts at making better software for laser cutters, and beyond. We hope you will continue to utilize LightBurn on a supported operating system going forward, and we thank you for being a part of the LightBurn community.

Sincerely,

The LightBurn Software Team

Copyright © 2024 LightBurn Software. All rights reserved. "

I appreciate that there willing to refund recently bought liscences and all versions up to 1.7 forever instead of DRM bullshit (you gotta buy the newest subscription service) {insert cable guys from southpark} But if your rewriting the framework then why kill off linux??? They said there working on a native arm build for MacOS which knowing apple your gonna half to buy the new macbook cause the old one is old and apple needs your money. So its not anymore of a reason to kill linux

TLDR: there killing linux support because its less than 1% of there userbase and they spend more money and time maintaining the lightburn build.

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com 1 points 3 months ago

Many of us at LightBurn are Linux users ourselves, and this decision was made reluctantly, after careful investigation of all possible avenues for continuing Linux support.

If y'all use Linux, then how the fuck do you not know about Flatpak, or even AppImage? Christ.

[–] Furycd001@fosstodon.org 1 points 3 months ago

@Steamymoomilk At the very least, they could create deb & or rpm packages. They also have the option to use flatpak, snap, or appimage....

[–] August27th@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Tell me you are too oblivious to implement CI/CD without telling me you're too oblivious to to implement CI/CD. Their builds and packaging should have been fully automated if it was such a pain. If you can make a Mac version of any software, you can make a Linux version. The debate internally was likely management being dumb as rocks and overruling anyone who actually knows anything.

[–] ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't think they're worried about packaging so much as the fact that what works on one distro might be mysteriously incompatible on another

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] August27th@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago
[–] skymtf@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I mean the apis are totally different on MacOS, like MacOS is not Linux by any means

[–] semperverus@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Sure, but the CI/CD pipeline would take care of that for you for every single build. You build the pipeline once and then forget about it until Apple makes some breaking change. Meanwhile, you push the code to your repository one time and watch as the machine automatically builds all 50 installers for you in one go AND publishes them for you without having to lift a finger.

[–] inetknght@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

As someone who's written pipelines who do exactly that on Windows, macOS, Linux across x86_64, aarch64, and MIPS, with optimized, unoptimized, instrumented for ASAN, instrumented for TSAN, and instrumented for coverage, and does it all in a distributed containerized workflow... It's not as easy as it sounds. Honestly macOS is way more of a hassle to deal with than Linux.

Unless you need ROS. ROS is utter garbage. ROS is popular in robots. ROS is, unlike its name, not actually an operating system but rather a system of tools and utilities which do not follow any standards and certainly not the OS standards. I literally hate ROS. I would burn that shit to the ground and rebuild-the-world if I had the time to.

[–] transientpunk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

To our valued Linux users:

Fuck you.

Sincerely,

The LightBurn Software Team

[–] AndrewZabar@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Oooo I didn’t know Lemmy had automatic translation lol.

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They're all valid reasons...

[–] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

But they're not - it's the same old, tired excuse that was never true.

"Too many different distros" was never really a good argument.
Just support one and users will figure it out, like we always do.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

This is a commercial product - users expect support when things don't work. You can't simply reply with "Hey, go figure it out" and point them at a lemmy community.

In fact they address this further down:

but a lot of Linux users will see “We support xxxx” and they’ll go off and try a different distro. It’ll mostly work, but then something doesn’t, and it takes a while for us to figure out why, and then we get a lot of arguments over why their chosen distro should work, and why we should be supporting it.

[–] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 months ago

users expect support when things don’t work

no shit, that's why you refuse support for users with unsupported configurations.
This is not a new concept.
It's standard for big companies to say they only support RHEL or Ubuntu, in every other case you're on your own.

Instead of axing their entire Linux support they could just do the reasonable thing, which is ignore issues that are out of scope.

Or should they support users trying to run their software on Windows 95, just because it's still technically Windows?

[–] 5redie8@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

With my incredibly limited knowledge of the system, it feels like Flatpak would be a solution to this, right? Or are they too isolated to support a printing system?