Re: ideas
From: Ed Murphy (emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com)
Date: 02/27/04
- Next message: James McIninch: "Re: ideas"
- Previous message: EventHelix.com: "Re: basic question in TCP connection"
- In reply to: b: "ideas"
- Next in thread: Max: "Re: ideas"
- Reply: Max: "Re: ideas"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:15:40 GMT
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 03:12:09 -0800, b wrote:
> People should choose standard that will be mandatory. You can add
> your version too,
> but this has to exist and be seleceted by default.
De facto standards (tgz, rpm, dpkg) can and should emerge. Developers
may ignore the standards (elrav1); they may make themselves and their
programs look like doofuses, but this is a feature not a bug.
> With this two simple rules, you can download any program of the net
> and use it your
> own distribution.
Except for, oops, package dependencies.
> You can not expect novice users to know or want to learn about
> compiling from source.
> It has some advantages, but is too much for average beginners. Linux
> on desktop is
> what linux advocates want, right?
In principle, there's nothing preventing someone from developing a GUI
source installer that's basically a front end to "./configure && make
&& make install". For all I know, maybe someone already has.
> With these two rules distros can distribute just main stuff like
> kernel, X Window...
> You do not have to download and install GIMP, or OPEN OFFICE with
> every distro. You can
> download it once and use many times with different distros.
And how long does it take to download OpenOffice over a 56K modem?
> One way of solving installing/uninstalling, dependecy problem is
> Gobolinux. It has every
> program in its own directory.
Which violates your "everyone should use Red Hat's directory structure"
suggestion. That said, it's an interesting suggestion, reminiscent of
Mac OS X (as I understand it). Removing a package results in lots of
broken symlinks; they have a general-purpose tool for removing broken
symlinks.
Guess what, though: it doesn't automagically resolve dependency
problems! You still need a system for that.
http://www.gobolinux.org/index.php?lang=en_US&page=differences
"we do have a basic dependency tracking system going"
> Using apt get is just solving consequences, not cause of problems.
I don't see how any of your suggestions solves the cause of the
problem (i.e. "packages have dependencies"). I don't see how that
problem *could* be solved, except by one of the following:
1) Write a package with no dependencies whatsoever. Madness! You'd
reinvent all sorts of wheels.
2) Distribute all dependencies with your package. Also madness! You'd
have to include a copy of Qt with every single KDE application, and
a copy of GTK with every single Gnome application, and...
No no, the theory of apt get ("find and install whatever dependencies
aren't already installed on this particular system") is perfectly
sound. I don't think I have apt get installed here, but it's basically
just a one-end-user (me) system with light server usage; if it were
doing heavier lifting, then I would certainly go get apt-for-Red-Hat
which I have heard about.
> BSD people are much more coherent that Linux people.
Well, *that* rates about a 9.4 on the Troll-O-Meter [tm]. I'll give
you the benefit of the doubt on the rest of your post, though.
- Next message: James McIninch: "Re: ideas"
- Previous message: EventHelix.com: "Re: basic question in TCP connection"
- In reply to: b: "ideas"
- Next in thread: Max: "Re: ideas"
- Reply: Max: "Re: ideas"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
