Re: Does Suse Suck?

On Sun, 07 Jan 2007 10:10:12 +0100, houghi wrote this:

noi wrote:
I didn't give this thread much credence. I like SUSE.

But I'm concerned about the interoperability between Linux distros.
Specifically the big horses, SUSE and RH/FC.

IMO, these development houses (at least OpenSuse and Fedora) are making
so many tweaks within their distros that eventually the distros won't
support 3rd party software.

SUSE is going back to an as much vanilla kernel as possible.

That's interesting but Linux could use a basic platform as well.


<snip>
For example, OpenSuSE uses AppArmor and FC uses SELINUX, different
versions of JRE, different locations for some apps, etc. I mention
security packages because I have to turn one off for NFS to work.

First is is normal that different distributions will use different
packages. That is why they are different distributions.

If Linux distros hope to replace Win on the desktop they need to make
sure what's installed are applications that most users will need, use,
and those apps are easy to configure for the average Dick and Jane.
Linux developers need to standardize on what basic apps are needed and
their distros are interoperable.

Please no standarisation on what apps need to be installed. If all
distributions are the same, then there is no need for different
distributions.

Also I am not interested in replacing Windows. I am not in it to go
against Windows.


Thank you for the reply. Standards take many forms. In this case it's
not the packages that need standards it's the implementation,
interoperability that counts so that 3rd party developers can run their
apps on any distribution.

For example, if Suse decided to stop supporting 32-bit apps in favor of
64-bit apps, it's a huge impact on 3rd party developers, the people who
really make Linux a usable OS.

I'm really grateful to Linux developers but IMO distros developers need
to step back from "jeez whiz" applications (Xen, Compviz, etc.) and
concentrate on ease of use, interoperability, 3rd party compatibility
and then security.

I would have the order reversed. Security, compatibilaty, interoperability
and then ease of use.

houghi

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Does Suse Suck?
    ... But I'm concerned about the interoperability between Linux distros. ... That is why they are different distributions. ... those apps are easy to configure for the average Dick and Jane. ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: Does Suse Suck?
    ... But I'm concerned about the interoperability between Linux distros. ... those apps are easy to configure for the average Dick and Jane. ... I'm really grateful to Linux developers but IMO distros developers need to ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: Does Suse Suck?
    ... I'm making the argument that distros need to ... It could very well be that standard use disable NFS, ... if it's insecure it's the NFS developers problem as in patches. ... ease of use, interoperability and security. ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: Does Suse Suck?
    ... make sure when they add apps it doesn't break something else and works ... interoperability, but we are not talking about developers with tons of ... affected by distros bundling apps that when activated break these apps. ... implement default secure procedures. ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: Does Suse Suck?
    ... application and command. ... I'm making the argument that distros need to ... make sure when they add apps it doesn't break something else and works ... It would be good if developers would pay more attention to ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)