Actually, I'll bite on some of his later answers, where, unlike the one to the previous question. he does go through some specific issues he has 'with RPM/Dpkg':
"Other dependencies are not so simple, there is no file that reliably expresses the dependency, or the file could be in multiple locations"
Yes, that's what virtual dependencies / capabilities in both rpm and dpkg provide. As for files moving around, that's what the FHS is for. Got a
But in reality, you don't encounter this scenerio untill you install rpms/ debs on another distro. Big deal: binary packages will always be built against specific library versions. Autopackage doesn't solve that.
"because RPM is, at the end of the day, a tool to help distro makers, they sometimes add new macros and features to it and then use them in their specfiles. People want proper integration of course, so they use Mandrake specific macros "
That's a human problem. You can't fix it with technology. Taking away the ability to have custom macros is a bad thing. Encouraging proper behavior is a better thing.
"Bad interactions with source code: because the current versions of RPM don't check the system directly, they only check a database"
You don't mean bad interaction with source code. Installing from source works fine, provided you know how to make install you can easily reate an RPM of most autoconf apps in about 2 minutes.
You mean bad interaction with non-packaged software. Again, that's a human issue, but one that's been solved better and better over time. Both OSS projects and proprietary vendors including Adobe's, BEAs, Macromedia etc. all release properly packaged binaries.
And frankly, I like having a database. I want to be able to find out what package was responsible for installing a file, and a URL where I can get a new version of the software. I like having a checksum of all my files at install time, so I can see if they've changed later. All of which autopackage doesn't do.
I don't like anything that encourages people to install unsigned applications from the internet, which autopackage does.
"a dependency does not encode any information on where to find it"
Yes, Great they kept that shit out of the dependency isn't it? Because what provides that capability isn't determined by the software. My app needs a webserver. That could be thhtpd, Apache httpd, Roxen, or whatever else. Rather than specifying what package provides that dependency, they simply list the depency. Three of my available packages say they provide a webserver capability. When a new webserver comes out, it will say it provides that capability too. Without requiring a new package of the thing that wants a webserver. Brilliant stuff!
What RPM is not good at is non-core packages, ie programs available from the net, from commercial vendors, magazine coverdisks and so on.
Why not? If you're going to spend a metric shitload of time creating a new packaging format and you want anyone to use it, some actual justification might help.
Personally, I'd add non DB backends, suggests/recommends, and non root installs to RPM, or add better file / signature verification, a DB backend, and non root installs to dpkg.
You would think that a serious enterprise Linux distro would support filesystems beyond ext3.
Asides from a variety of speed bumps to Ext3 in RHEL 4 (mainly a different elevator algorithm, plus more) Red Hat supports (and has Open Sourced) GFS, which is both a SAN and on-disk filesystem.
If you need it, you pay extra for support, but if you're already using a few TB of storage, its not too expensive.
Reiser doesn't work properly with SELinux (still!) and most adminstrators think it has terrible recovery tools. In the past, its also had serious problems with NFS.
You're all just mad because i didn't mention Red Hat.
No, just puzzled.
Seriously though, the question really has nothing to do with the distribution, I'm concerned primarily with the infrastructure provided by Novell and Sun to support and implement the distribution.
There's around four times the amount of people working on Linux at Red Hat than working on Linux for Novell. They're marketshare of server distributions is greater than all other competitors. They have more certified software, and software tends to be certified against RHEL before SuSE.
They also don't encourage the use of ReiserFS, which has had fights with NFS, still has fights with SELinux, and terrible recovery tools.
I use Debian, and apt-get is great, but half the time after choosing to install something new I couldn't find it by looking through the menus.
This depends on your distro. Fedora and Suse always put menu items into one, standardized menu, which contains all your GUI apps.
Debian has a seperate menu for 'Debian Apps' [?] which isn't always used. Lack of a graphical method to launch a graphical app doesn't seem to be considered a bug by most Debian developers and users I speak to.
Were they: * involved in producing original content? Yes. * that was non-fictional? Yes. * from an impartial viewpoint? Yes. * which were then distributed? Yes.
They're more the journalists than the AAP writers who re-hash press releases written by HPs PR company, or the staff at Channel 7 in Australia that aired an (unlabelled but) obviously Telstra sponsored piece on wireless internet during the nightly news.
And hitting 'submit' doesn't check your typing;^).
To eleborate on my point, if the thign that being taped to the wall is an original, non-fiction document created by the person doing the posting, then yes, I'd say he was a journalist. Albeit with an usual distribution method.
If a Press Release was rewritten by some AAP writer and distributed in a national newspaper, I wouldn't say the so-called author was a journlist.
Being a member of a journalist roup doesn't make your a journalist. There's many writers for large magazines that have no need for membership of these organizations.
Just as there's a lot of shit writers with journalism degrees who can't get work, and great writers who've never been to university.
The Mac Mini isn't exactly a unique design. Its a small silver box, with a white top. Thee have been many other small silver box computers. You could argue its a smaller version of a shuttle case.
Since most OSX users seems to be angry zealots, I'd like to point out I own a Mac Mini lest you attack me.
Linux's security to be infallible and thus do nothing to protect their machine.
* Install a firewall? Wait, that was done for me (no, 7 ports open by default isn't considered a firewall, XP users). * Change default permissions to not turn execute on for every downloaded file? Done for me. * Run a web browser that doesn't use ActiveX controls, so spyware that Microsoft has *signed* as they always do if you ask them can't be installed? Check.
What else? Click the red thing on my desktop that harasses me when updates are available. OK, I need to do that, but as I don't have to reboot to install most updates (apart from the rare case ofa kernel update), the task is made much easier.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I'll bite on some of his later answers, where, unlike the one to the previous question. he does go through some specific issues he has 'with RPM/Dpkg':
"Other dependencies are not so simple, there is no file that reliably expresses the dependency, or the file could be in multiple locations"
Yes, that's what virtual dependencies / capabilities in both rpm and dpkg provide. As for files moving around, that's what the FHS is for. Got a
But in reality, you don't encounter this scenerio untill you install rpms/ debs on another distro. Big deal: binary packages will always be built against specific library versions. Autopackage doesn't solve that.
"because RPM is, at the end of the day, a tool to help distro makers, they sometimes add new macros and features to it and then use them in their specfiles. People want proper integration of course, so they use Mandrake specific macros "
That's a human problem. You can't fix it with technology. Taking away the ability to have custom macros is a bad thing. Encouraging proper behavior is a better thing.
"Bad interactions with source code: because the current versions of RPM don't check the system directly, they only check a database"
You don't mean bad interaction with source code. Installing from source works fine, provided you know how to make install you can easily reate an RPM of most autoconf apps in about 2 minutes.
You mean bad interaction with non-packaged software. Again, that's a human issue, but one that's been solved better and better over time. Both OSS projects and proprietary vendors including Adobe's, BEAs, Macromedia etc. all release properly packaged binaries.
And frankly, I like having a database. I want to be able to find out what package was responsible for installing a file, and a URL where I can get a new version of the software. I like having a checksum of all my files at install time, so I can see if they've changed later. All of which autopackage doesn't do.
I don't like anything that encourages people to install unsigned applications from the internet, which autopackage does.
"a dependency does not encode any information on where to find it"
Yes, Great they kept that shit out of the dependency isn't it? Because what provides that capability isn't determined by the software. My app needs a webserver. That could be thhtpd, Apache httpd, Roxen, or whatever else. Rather than specifying what package provides that dependency, they simply list the depency. Three of my available packages say they provide a webserver capability. When a new webserver comes out, it will say it provides that capability too. Without requiring a new package of the thing that wants a webserver. Brilliant stuff!
The FAQ answers that question with:
What RPM is not good at is non-core packages, ie programs available from the net, from commercial vendors, magazine coverdisks and so on.
Why not? If you're going to spend a metric shitload of time creating a new packaging format and you want anyone to use it, some actual justification might help.
Personally, I'd add non DB backends, suggests/recommends, and non root installs to RPM, or add better file / signature verification, a DB backend, and non root installs to dpkg.
1.) The dialog that appears asking for an admin password to install software. Directly ripped from OS X.
Pretty sure that was ripped from Linux, before OSX even existed, and I'm also quite certain Linux wasn't the first either.
Its just that nobody opn Slashdot knows how.
IE is a bunch of ActiveX components, the one people mention most often is MSHTML.DLL.
Its entirely possible to replace this with the Gecko ActiveX component. When you do that, help, explorer etc should use Gecko to render their HTML.
http://www.iol.ie/~locka/mozilla/mozilla.htm
An arse, with a clickwheel!
Reads article.
Damnit, they've already got that one...
In F/OSS circles, no such certification program exists. There is no list of requirements; there is no explicit testing service.
Actualy there's quite a few. Red Hat, SuSE and most of the major business distros have hardware certification programs.
For example...
Slashdot declares HTML version 3.2, and the w3c validator is actually much stricter than the written standard.
Sure. But do you think the written standard mentions you need to close a table or not?
Its been fixed now:
Revision as of 01:11, 15 Mar 2005
Line 1:- #REDIRECT[[de:en:Image:Autofellatio.jpg]]
The link is now a pciture of someonee fellating themselves.
You would think that a serious enterprise Linux distro would support filesystems beyond ext3.
Asides from a variety of speed bumps to Ext3 in RHEL 4 (mainly a different elevator algorithm, plus more) Red Hat supports (and has Open Sourced) GFS, which is both a SAN and on-disk filesystem.
If you need it, you pay extra for support, but if you're already using a few TB of storage, its not too expensive.
Reiser doesn't work properly with SELinux (still!) and most adminstrators think it has terrible recovery tools. In the past, its also had serious problems with NFS.
You're all just mad because i didn't mention Red Hat.
No, just puzzled.
Seriously though, the question really has nothing to do with the distribution, I'm concerned primarily with the infrastructure provided by Novell and Sun to support and implement the distribution.
There's around four times the amount of people working on Linux at Red Hat than working on Linux for Novell. They're marketshare of server distributions is greater than all other competitors. They have more certified software, and software tends to be certified against RHEL before SuSE.
They also don't encourage the use of ReiserFS, which has had fights with NFS, still has fights with SELinux, and terrible recovery tools.
Do you think you should include RHEL?
I use Debian, and apt-get is great, but half the time after choosing to install something new I couldn't find it by looking through the menus.
This depends on your distro. Fedora and Suse always put menu items into one, standardized menu, which contains all your GUI apps.
Debian has a seperate menu for 'Debian Apps' [?] which isn't always used. Lack of a graphical method to launch a graphical app doesn't seem to be considered a bug by most Debian developers and users I speak to.
But maybe that's changed.
Were they:
* involved in producing original content? Yes.
* that was non-fictional? Yes.
* from an impartial viewpoint? Yes.
* which were then distributed? Yes.
They're more the journalists than the AAP writers who re-hash press releases written by HPs PR company, or the staff at Channel 7 in Australia that aired an (unlabelled but) obviously Telstra sponsored piece on wireless internet during the nightly news.
And hitting 'submit' doesn't check your typing ;^).
To eleborate on my point, if the thign that being taped to the wall is an original, non-fiction document created by the person doing the posting, then yes, I'd say he was a journalist. Albeit with an usual distribution method.
If a Press Release was rewritten by some AAP writer and distributed in a national newspaper, I wouldn't say the so-called author was a journlist.
Being a member of a journalist roup doesn't make your a journalist. There's many writers for large magazines that have no need for membership of these organizations.
Just as there's a lot of shit writers with journalism degrees who can't get work, and great writers who've never been to university.
In other news, the US will declare war on Australia in six months time.
offer is only valid with purchase of Kevin of equal or lesser size
You work for Xerox?
A browser with the security of MSHTML and the sleek looks of a morbidly obese person's arse.
The Mac Mini isn't exactly a unique design. Its a small silver box, with a white top. Thee have been many other small silver box computers. You could argue its a smaller version of a shuttle case.
Since most OSX users seems to be angry zealots, I'd like to point out I own a Mac Mini lest you attack me.
Linux's security to be infallible and thus do nothing to protect their machine.
* Install a firewall? Wait, that was done for me (no, 7 ports open by default isn't considered a firewall, XP users).
* Change default permissions to not turn execute on for every downloaded file? Done for me.
* Run a web browser that doesn't use ActiveX controls, so spyware that Microsoft has *signed* as they always do if you ask them can't be installed? Check.
What else? Click the red thing on my desktop that harasses me when updates are available. OK, I need to do that, but as I don't have to reboot to install most updates (apart from the rare case ofa kernel update), the task is made much easier.
Asus produce iBooks, or Powerbooks (I forget) for Apple and their own branded laptops are as close as you can get to Apple's.
The term 'personal bug' was a poor one - I should have said bug that affects you personally.
Anyway, the non-network diagrammer audience is larger than the rest.
I think it merely points out the differences in approach between two people. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of an ulterior motive here.
Personally, I shell out for good looking Powerpoint presnetations and use 'em in Impress.
But anyway, an idea:
Post OOo 2 release, why not have a competition for best templates? Authors contribute in exchange for publicity.
"CoolThing 7"
Created by Smithworks Graphics. For more Smithworks templates, click (here)."