MicroSoft and Apple already have these things? Why cant the Linux community just settle on a set of standards? I mean we could try but we would spend years arguing over them. So what we are left with iws a front runner distro in the form of Red Hat and RPM. Both of which arent bad standards. Linux ahs great promise but we have to solve these things.
When I left the Linux industry in 2001 it was because we couldnt find the time to get serious about standards. Let alone a basic agreement on what we should ue as an install tool.
Developing standards would have solved a lot of the problems we were facing back then but no one wanted to do that. All Nick is saying is that we need standards.
You need to code to a distrobution instead of coding for a generic Linux system. Because there is no such thing as a standard Linux distrobution with the possible exceptin of Red Hat. Trying to make a generic, bullet proof installer would be a neat hack, but you would quickly burry yourself in solving whacky depenancies and everything would be a constant moving target
For better or worse, I'm kind of a Windows worker now and I kind of like the fact that when I code for WinXP I dont have to worry about what libraries are there. If I code for Red Hat 9 I know whatlibraries are there and I dont have to push any more magic into the system.
Just my 2 cents worth, and I think thats about all its worth
Mr. Petrelley's areticle looks pretty good. But I think red hat's already done thsi and we should just code to that.
Slashdot Mirror
MicroSoft and Apple already have these things? Why cant the Linux community just settle on a set of standards? I mean we could try but we would spend years arguing over them. So what we are left with iws a front runner distro in the form of Red Hat and RPM. Both of which arent bad standards. Linux ahs great promise but we have to solve these things. When I left the Linux industry in 2001 it was because we couldnt find the time to get serious about standards. Let alone a basic agreement on what we should ue as an install tool. Developing standards would have solved a lot of the problems we were facing back then but no one wanted to do that. All Nick is saying is that we need standards. You need to code to a distrobution instead of coding for a generic Linux system. Because there is no such thing as a standard Linux distrobution with the possible exceptin of Red Hat. Trying to make a generic, bullet proof installer would be a neat hack, but you would quickly burry yourself in solving whacky depenancies and everything would be a constant moving target For better or worse, I'm kind of a Windows worker now and I kind of like the fact that when I code for WinXP I dont have to worry about what libraries are there. If I code for Red Hat 9 I know whatlibraries are there and I dont have to push any more magic into the system. Just my 2 cents worth, and I think thats about all its worth Mr. Petrelley's areticle looks pretty good. But I think red hat's already done thsi and we should just code to that.