I’m legit confused by this meme. Is it talking about those executables that Windows users download and run willy-nilly?

This is so on point.

I get not wanting to compile your code. Its extra work and, if you're already catering to a very thech-savvy crowd, you can let them deal with the variance and extra compile time.

BUT if you're releasing your code for others TO USE and you don't provide reproducible instructions, what's the point?!?

Heard.
Sounds far too windowish but there are only a couply techie-meme comms, so I figured I'd drop it here anyway.

here is a checksum of my /usr/lib folder

That's actually not as trivial as it seems, because you need a canonical representation of that directory to generate such a thing in the same way on each side.

You need to encode the metadata in a standard way, encode new data that shows up in a standard way, and various people can add more metadata to files: think like Posix ACLs or the immutable flag or whatever.

Then there is maybe some metadata that you probably want to exclude, like atime (though not if you're something like rsync -U!), and some metadata that you almost-certainly want to exclude, like inode number.

The OS's file APIs won't have a defined order in which they return entries in a directory. Like, they'll normally just return it in whatever order things come back from the filesystem, which is probably whatever is most-efficient for the filesystem in question, given how things are encoded on disk. If you sort the directory entries, then it can't be

as is the case for most things on the system

done in a locale-dependent fashion. Utilities like tar don't impose a canonical ordering, so you can't just dump the problems on tar by checksumming a tarball of the directory.

EDIT: tar does appear to have a canonical ordering option today, though it also probably doesn't have the constraint of being backwards-compatible with metadata included, another thing that one would need for such a checksum if one were to leverage tar.

Or just a plain no

I sometimes will write something but I don't provide free support for random people on the internet. Just because I publish some code doesn't mean I'm actively working on it. I'm not about to drop everything for some jank program I made years ago.

that's far preferable tbh. i'm much more likely to try out some piece of software if it does not require sudo to install.

Car no go install, car go vrr vrr

If you have a dockerfile, take the extra step of making the workflow that builds the container and pushes it to a registry somewhere.

Shame that it seems like people don't realize you're using a real issue someone opened on github as a copypasta.

Also probably worth noting that this is the exact type of person who should never be allowed to use Sherlock.

So, from a technical standpoint, that's the correct answer (well, I'd use ionice -c3 nice -n20 make -j$(nproc)).

But...I kind of feel that most of the time, if someone is likely to be asking an upstream project for a binary installer, it might not be a great idea for them to be installing non-package-managed stuff systemwide. I don't know if they'd be in a good position to diagnose or fix issues arising from that. Maybe use something like alien.

I'd be less-concerned about compiling to and invoking locally from the compilation directory, something that most packages permit for.

Padmé may not realize that it's not Anakin's job if Padmé is coming off Windows, because if Padmé uses Windows, Padmé's user workflow is "go to developer's website, download binary installer", and it'd be really weird for the developer to not provide a binary installer. Windows doesn't have distros that distribute software (well, okay, I guess Windows has an app store or something these days and Steam, and that's a bit analogous, but that's not how things work traditionally).

My assumption would be that it's not that Padmé's being entitled, just that Padmé doesn't know how this works and is confused and thus frustrated.