Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why Mandrake is Too Cool for UnitedLinux

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the no-surprise-here dept.

An anonymous reader says "Mandrake's lastest community (spam) newsletter contains their explanation as to why they won't join in on UnitedLinux. Besides the obvious geek-fun of rolling their own distro, they claim that the underlying idea of UnitedLinux is based on a flawed comparison to the Unix world of the 80's. " I think the whole UnitedLinux thing is lame- the distros that want to be compatible already are. UL is just the 2nd tier distros trying to get attention and ink away from the "evil forces" in North Carolina. I'll just stick to the best distribution and watch the fun from afar ;)

3 of 362 comments (clear)

  1. At least they're committed to LSB. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am not a fan of mandrake, but this is an extremely well-written document all the way through. I would like everyone to take note of the fact Mandrake seems to be committing in here to follow the LSB.. so that's good. One thing i wonder about though:

    "In the same spirit, all software publishers should certify their products for a given version of the LSB (Linux Standard Base), not for a particular brand of Linux. Therefore, that software would work equally well with any Linux distribution that is in conformity with the LSB. "

    Is this correct? The UnitedLinux people have been implying that they are somehow just the logical conclusion of the idea of the LSB, and in some way they will make things easier for developers-- i.e., less varied systems to test. Is this correct, or just misleading marketing? Are there any situations where it would be possible to certify a single binary for UnitedLinux, but not possible to certify a single binary for the LSB becuase the LSB is not extensive enough?

  2. UnitedLinux is not the solution by bigjocker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We Linux users know there is a problem with the current linux distributions. It's not only an interoperability problem, but a core one. We have came to a point where we knew we were going to get to, but we haven't tought of a solution because we were making linux ready for the mainstream. Now is the time to solve this, UnitedLinux is a start, but, as many of you, I dont like the approach they took.

    We all know all the problems with RPM based distros, compatibility between them breaks a lot, and, even if you should have only one RPM for any distro, when we go to download an application we get a RH6.X.rpm, RH7.rpm, MDK8.rpm, MKD8.1.rpm, etc ...

    I'm a Mandrake user, and I love it, but I have seen apt-get working, and I'm really impressed. I think apt-get is the right direction for a real package management tool for all distros. This is the direction package managment under Linux should be taking, and not creating commercial standards without atacking the core of the problem nor creating apt-like solutions or apt-like-frontends for rpm based solutions.

    Conclution: LSB + apt-get should be mandatory to be able to call anything a Linux distribution. I know a lot of us would kill for apt-get to be the default package manager in all distributions.

    --
    Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow.
  3. Re:mandrake by Matt2000 · · Score: 5, Interesting


    "I will always only install Mandrake."

    This is clearly retarded. Why do computer dudes always throw down insane ultimatums? It gives us a bad name and it's the reason people in companies don't trust us.

    "DOS 6.3 is the last operating system this company will every use, PERIOD."
    "Get out."
    "Ok."

    --