Hacker News Reader

Comment by londons_explore | Hacker News Reader

Because macos has no decent concept of package management or containerization.

I mean. The issue at hand was that they purposely left the webserver behind to auto reinstall if a zoom link was clicked. This was an intended feature, and the same could have been done on Linux or Windows. Package management or containers are irrelevant to this conversation.

A package manager would typically have removed the web server, too.

As far as I know most traditional package managers only remove files and folders declared in the package. Not files installed somewhere else during the install script or created by the binary when it runs.

Files installed elsewhere during the install script are treated as config files and can be purged, no?

Sure, the "package managers" on Linux, Windows, and macOS all behavior in pretty similar fashions. A manifest of files that the installer knew at time of install. That doesn't stop a program from installing anything else at run time, or even in the installer (since they can define what to remove in a lot of cases). This wasn't an "accident," it was purposely left behind with the intention of being used to onboard users easily even after they removed the client. This would have pretty much been an issue on every platform (had it been implemented on other platforms). And please, don't tell me "but Docker!" Docker, at present, isn't really usable with GUI applications yet.

And please, don't tell me "but Docker!" Docker, at present, isn't really usable with GUI applications yet.

But Flatpak! Flatpak applications can be sandboxed and you can install/remove applications as one unit.

Is Flatpak still open to the issues outlined at http://flatkill.org/?

If so, it doesn’t seem much better.

A package manager would be designed to remove any non user hostile features. Intentionally hostile behavior would be unaffected. One might hope that the packager, the person that is, might have refused to include software from incompetent or hostile developers.

Something an app store due to volume and default allow pending mostly automated checks has a problem with.

that is explicitly incorrect. macos has a very nice and effective way of packaging all the components needed by an app into tidy bundles.

the problem in this case is that the developers just couldn't be assed even trying.

No, the de vintentionally circumvented the bundling and containerization that exists, and MacOS couldn't prevent it. That said, Windows and Linux can't prevent it either, in common configurations.

Not really, If you have a standard app that can be dragged into the trash, sure. If you have a kernel extension, or a launch deamon or any application data you store locally you cannot clean up after yourself without a custom uninstaller. Windows is far ahead in its centralized Add&Remove Programs area.

This is false. Kernel extensions can be part of the application bundle and will be unloaded and removed when the bundle is removed.

Installing KEXTs in an application bundle allows an application to register those KEXTs without the need to install them permanently elsewhere within the system hierarchy. This may be more convenient and allows the KEXT to be associated with a specific, running application. When it starts, the application can register the KEXT and, if desired, unregister it on exit.

For example, a network packet sniffer application might employ a Network Kernel Extension (NKE). A tape backup application would require that a tape driver be loaded during the duration of the backup process. When the application exits, the kernel extension is no longer needed and can be unloaded.

Source: https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Da...

You can also launch agents that are part of your application bundle:

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/servicemanagement/...

It is true that you cannot remove application data, but that is a feature (maybe users want to retain the data) and also does not happen in e.g. Linux package managers.

I am not sure it is false if you want it loaded on startup.

macOS has a very good concept of package management and containerization. It's just optional because people get even more up in arms when their old software doesn't work any more.

Apple also makes a fantastic computing platform with very good mandatory isolation, namely, iOS. If you're interested in isolation in preference to compatibility with traditional desktop software, an unjailbroken iPad Pro with Smart Keyboard is a pretty good option.

I don't think it's just old software that might break. One must also consider the software not yet to be written. If the isolation is too constraining for some type of application that really needs a privilege, and isolation is mandatory, then some amount of innovation will just have to happen somewhere else or not at all.

Remember old school Mac was full of hacks upon hacks upon hacks, many by third parties, and there was cool stuff in there too. The App Store mentality has caused everyone to overreact and think that every third party app on the planet will turn into the worst conception of Win98 era malware overnight if unconstrained, when this is just one outcome among many possible.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com