Slashdot Mirror
Bruce Perens on the new Debian Common Core
StromPetroke writes "On August 9th, online Linuxzine Mad Penguin conducted an interview with veteran Open Source advocate Bruce Perens on the DCC (Debian Common Core) Alliance. According to Bruce, the DCC will provide a way to "be able to certify to a Linux distribution, and then there will be multiple support providers who can support that same platform and who differentiate themselves at a higher level up the stack.""
Software is updated all the time.
... ya right...
What you need are STANDARDS in the software development process. E.g. for any given releast in Vx.y [fixed x] the config/command line parameters should be backwards compatible, etc, etc, etc.
From this you can get a bit better stable moving target.
As it stands people are largely just using "Best judgement" which often works but you occasionally get the "Why the fuck did you do that you psyhco motherfuck!" reaction to having a configuration file move three times within 6 months [hey Gentoo, wake the fuck up]
Look how well standards work for RH, this install [FC3] is ludicrously out of date and most of the tools routinely die on standard html, pdf, etc files.... Think I can easily upgrade it and not CHANGE THE ENTIRE OS AROUND?
So before we set standards based on "what's on the disk" let's set standards based on "what's in the package".
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
That's interesting. How many Debian Based Distributions are there?
Is this supposed to keep Debain Based Distributions up to date at least with Debian?
-Brent
To me, this is clearly a step in the right direction. I have long been seing the rising number of debian-forks to be a problem for compability and a spreading of resources. In a DCCA world the high number of distributions would be an advantage, since each compliant distro can cater to a specific subset of users, while the community at large will still be able to cooperate cross-distro.
The fact that Ubuntu (the distro currently on my desktop) is not a member of the DCCA does not bother me very much. The whole initiative of invoking standards is the important idea. If the standard is made, I am sure Ubuntu and other non-DCCA debian forks/branches will follow suit.
In soviet Russia, Raymond loves Everybody, including, but not limited to, YOU!
with the way that some of these distros work. One of the things that really bugs me about the BSD variants is that they are "so stable", "so secure" that they are too out of date. And this is what happened with debian for me.
... server. So I would recommend it to anyone for those things. Anyway, this isn't a flame post, but my 2 cents. Thanks.
Not too long ago I was a Debian devotee. I wouldn't touch another distro. But my problem is that I am pretty busy, and if a problem occures, and you don't have the time to fix it, new problems just pop up and pretty soon cleaning up the mess seems too far out of reach.
These guys are talented and devoted to their distro, and they should be. But for a developer like me, who needs a machine running day and night and isn't willing to rejoin the darkside, debian got to be too much work for me to maintain as my desktop system. But for my existing server installations, I wouldn't change a thing. Debian is easy to maintain for standard things: web, print,
Actually, he does have a serious conflict of interest with respect to the OSRM insurance programs and his opinions on patent pools and non-GPL licenses.
I pretty much always take what he says with a spoonful of salt.
Hmmm, this smells like UnitedLinux with a newer website. This time around it's the current second-fiddle linux distros, instead of the old ones.
The only marked difference seems to be that unitedlinux mentions 'servers'. Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad idea, but for some reason UnitedLinux fizzled, with the last PR 2 years ago. So what's different this time?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)