Slashdot Mirror
What Needs Fixing In Linux
An anonymous reader writes "Infoweek's Fixing Linux: What's Broken And What To Do About It argues that the 17-year-old open-source operating system still has problems. Leading the list is author Serdar Yegulap's complaint that the kernel application binary interfaces are a moving target. He writes: 'The sheer breadth of kernel interfaces means it's entirely possible for something to break in a way that might not even show up in a fairly rigorous code review.' Also on his list of needed fixes are: a consistent configuration system, to enable distribution; native file versioning; audio APIs; and the integration of X11 with apps. Finally, he argues that Linux needs a committee to insure that all GUIs work consistently and integrate better on the back-end with the kernel."
http://www.freedesktop.org/ is the link. Was that really so hard?
~ C.
He complains:
Who else should do it?
He complains the distribution differences make life hard for people selling software. Well, tough, if they want money maybe they should work for it?
I know! Let's recreate the windows registry, but this time better!. Yawn.
Just about the shittiest article I've read for a long time.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
> 1. Filesystem metadata/permissions. An example would be that a file should be able to keep a list of all the dates it was accessed.
Makes things slow. Most distros turn off logging the 'atime' (access time) because this requires writing to the disk on every read.
> Why can a file only have one owner/group?
To keep things simple, the GUI is kept this way. You can make it as complicated as want though with Access Control Lists - just like you do in Windows.
For a GUI way to set this, see something like: http://rofi.roger-ferrer.org/eiciel/?s=5
2. Root is God. This must really be fixed. There should be a way for root to irrevocably divest its powers, and root does not need to access users file.
This is called SELinux and is installed with pretty much every distribution. But for what you want, the users should instead use encrypted home directories.
> 3. They lie about everything is a file. Why not extend this to networking resources ('cd http://www.gnu.org/ [gnu.org] would be cool ).
This is called FUSE, and is included with every distribution.
My biggest complainst are that I cannot get a static IP on my home wireless while getting DHCP everywhere else
Then tell your home wireless to reserve an IP address for your laptop's MAC address. It's an option in the Netgear router I use.
This is, I believe, what -v is for.
Really, what's with all the strawmen today?
quite apart from the fact that it has very little to do with 'not wanting to disclose your hardware', it is not the linux-way. the linux-way is to make the best possible kernel. for this reason, the binary interface keeps changing to make it better. the drivers just need to be maintained by people who are aware of this fact. if that means that the driver disk you got with your all-in-one scanner-copier-coffee machine doesn't work after 2 years, so be it.
We don't want that support. Those vendors have a tendency to produce low-quality drivers, and reduce the overall stability of the system.
Most Vista and XP (and previously, Windows 98) apologists agree that the biggest reason Windows is perceived as unstable is due to low-quality drivers for low-quality hardware.
By selecting hardware known to work with Free Software, I'm pretty much guaranteed a solid and stable experience.
...it seems like someone with very little experience wouldn't know exactly what package would best suit them....
Isn't that going to be true with any operating system? If you don't understand it, you ask, or buy it premade for you.
If someone isn't willing to investigate, then the only way they will start using linux is if someone installs it for them. Whether that person be a friend, or a store-bought eeePC with a debian etch variant.
the kernel application binary interfaces are a moving target.
That's why we have glibc, which abstracts that ABI from applications.
Kernel driver interface - the horse was already beaten to death many times ( see here ).
a consistent configuration system, to enable distribution;
Windows tried that with Registry - and it didn't worked. And it will never work since "one size never fits all" requirements of all applications.
native file versioning;
Was tried many times before and failed miserably. As long as majority of files are blobs, versioning on level of file system makes no sense. Versioning on level of applications is implemented already more or less everywhere it was needed and SVN/git is there for the rest of applications.
audio APIs;
See ALSA and its user-space libraries.
See SDL.
and the integration of X11 with apps.
As was shown by FreeDesktop initiative not really needed nor X folks want to be bothered by all the end user bells and whistles.
Finally, he argues that Linux needs a committee to insure that all GUIs work consistently and integrate better on the back-end with the kernel.
Committee?? Buahahhahahaha!!!1!!cos(0)!!!!!!!
All what he says was tried before (see (11)) and generally can be described as "failed".
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
The Windows target may change, but most well written programs written to API's and system variables instead of hard coded paths will work with all versions of Windows from 98/NT on. And as far as msi, exe and cab files go, the msi format has been used since Windows 2000, and cab files are just another compression format.
A well written program from 1998 will still work and install today.