HOLY SHIT. Portage is fucking bloat

HOLY SHIT. Portage is fucking bloat.

Just install from source.

How will Jow Forums even fucking recover?

Attached: 2018-04-18-171615_161x54_scrot.png (161x54, 13K)

portage installs from source. fun fact: it performs the functionality of a package manager so that i dont have to be a package manager when i am doing my job.

>LISP-2
You deserve this. Take the scheme-pill

>lisp is beautifu-

There's nothing ugly about that, it's just demonstrating separate namespaces for variables and functions. A 'feature' that only some variants of lisp have.

>portage installs from source
bloat
install from source yourself

which would you rather waste, hard drive space, or your time? Which is worth less to you?

If you truly care about bloat, you must choose to not have bloat. If you want to talk about saving time, have a look at some binary distributions.

time

The discussion between portage and building software yourself assumed you have some requirement that is best filled by building software yourself. Given that, would you rather waste a little hard drive space, or a lot of your time?

Reminder that the time portage spends building your software is time you could be spending doing something else. You don't have to babysit portage.

Most normal people would say time. Not using portage is time-bloat, which is worse than disk-bloat.

Why do you keep bringing up time? This is about portage being bloat, not about time.

You're talking about disk bloat while neglecting to consider time-bloat.

Time/disk bloat distinction is something you made up. Bloat is a well known term and is not used the way you think it is used.

>he isn't a NEET

Disk bloat is wasted disk space. Wasting the users time is another form of bloat. Your failure to consider it as a meaningful factor is the reason you don't understand the appeal of portage.

Every moment you spend not having portage install software for you is a moment you aren't spending microwaving chicken wings or masturbating to chinese cartoons.

I'm not considering factors or evaluating usefulness of bloat. I'm only saying portage is bloat which it is. Stop trying to wiggle your way out of this.

Installing software by hand bloats your schedule. Stop trying to wiggle your way out of this. Hard drive space is cheaper than my time.

Time bloat is not a thing, it's something you made up. You're literally not talking about software bloat anymore even, bloating time schedule? Come on.

Time bloat isn't real if you're a loser who can't think of anything to do with his life.

Mate. I am not talking about time. You seem to be really keen on convincing me that portage is useful, but I don't care about that, I'm not talking about that. All I'm talking about is portage is software bloat. You won't make this go away by talking about usefulness.

The largest user of portage is Chrome OS.

It's great if you've got a ton of machines compiling code for a custom OS.

>>Mate. I am not talking about time.
Yes, that is the oversight I've been pointing out.

It's not an oversight in a discussion about software bloat. A lot of bloated software saves user's time. That still does not make the software not bloated.

What you fail to consider is how software bloats your schedule not merely your hard drive.

That's something you made up. The word bloat is never used in this context.

Maybe not exactly the word bloat, but a statement frequently used about software minimalism is "Minimalism is not a lack of something. It's simply the perfect amount of something."

Attached: 1516069765445.jpg (1447x2039, 359K)

I wish portage weren't in python2... it's the last py2 package standing on my computer. Why did package managers stop being written in perl? Just because it can be written opaquely doesn't mean it has to be.

Portage automates boring legwork, that's like the definition of a good program

Attached: commodore.jpg (400x551, 214K)

>ITT: any software that takes disk and memory space is bloat regardless of functionality (i.e. all software).
>bloat is just a synonym for software