Comments on: A million distros? Bring ‘em on http://yavin4.anshul.info/2007/01/18/a-million-distros-bring-em-on/ Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:13:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: jagga http://yavin4.anshul.info/2007/01/18/a-million-distros-bring-em-on/comment-page-1/#comment-5069 jagga Fri, 26 Jan 2007 02:50:12 +0000 http://yavin4.anshul.info/2007/01/18/a-million-distros-bring-em-on/#comment-5069 this might be surprising but i kind of agree with the author. before you go all nuts, the author is actually talking about the lack of standardization in the *nix world. every distro has its own nuances, its own way of doing things (keeping file structures, config software, etc.) which in itself is not a bad thing but makes things hard to change/try new distributions. these things are esp. bad for commandline users who dont use the config software. a trivial example is the way in which the network interfaces are configured, in fcX world we have ifcfg-ethX files whereas in debian world everything has to be in a single interfaces file(i think it is called interfaces but not sure of the name). Again I am not saying one way is better than the other but just that they are *different*. i agree that diversity is good in config software but i would really appreciate if all the distributions conformed to some kind of standard about where they would store the files internally. i would really **love** to experience the same backend for all the distributions and have different frontends.... Just quoting the authors clarification from the same rant site "Walt: I think you missed some of my points. My rant against the proliferation of multitudes of distributions is that they all decide to do things differently. I'm talking about basic, simple things like where in the filesystem they put key bits of software. Despite supposed standards (a couple of conflicting ones, anyway) many distributors just do it differently because they can, not for any good or compelling reason. Ubuntu, for example, puts X modules in a different place than most current distros. Perhaps it's a Debianism or a new standard everyone should follow. I honestly don't know. I do know that with vanilla Ubuntu (or Kubuntu or Xubuntu) that you can't do: ./configure make make install for an X based app and have any prayer of it working unless you tell configure where to find things. Yes, configuration options can fix that issue. A newcomer won't know that, will they? GNewSense (it's not GNUSense) would be a nightmare for the typical user coming over from Windows. It would put them off Linux, perhaps permanently, if their very normal hardware simply doesn't work. It would be unusable in a corporate server farm as well. I see building a user base and gaining acceptance as more important than what Carla describes as hundreds of half-baked distros. I don't think you can extend my argument to window managers. I share your dislike for Gnome and KDE, though I do see KDE as probably the best choice for newcomers to Linux migrating from Windows provided they have a system with the necessary horsepower. My last two distro reviews covered Vector Linux 5.8 Standard (Xfce4 desktop) and Xubuntu Edgy Eft (also Xfce4 desktop). The need for lightweight distributions for older hardware and corresponding lightweight applications and window managers is pretty well undisputed. My article (rant?) talks about "general purpose distributions", not specialized ones with a distinct purpose not filled by Fedora or Ubuntu or Debian or SuSe. I also didn't put a fixed number on how many distributions there should be. I just said a distro for the sake of yet another distro is a really bad idea, particularly when it breaks standards and makes the life of newcomers to Linux difficult. FSF doesn't believe that 99% free is free enough. They are ideologically driven. They don't believe in having a choice to include or exclude proprietary software. They believe it is all evil. I just don't share Richard Stallman's view of the software world or all of his ideology. OK, maybe proprietary software is truly evil, but for now it remains a necessary evil. That, too, was one of my main points. Caitlyn Martin | January 16, 2007 02:44 PM " this might be surprising but i kind of agree with the author. before you go all nuts, the author is actually talking about the lack of standardization in the *nix world. every distro has its own nuances, its own way of doing things (keeping file structures, config software, etc.) which in itself is not a bad thing but makes things hard to change/try new distributions. these things are esp. bad for commandline users who dont use the config software. a trivial example is the way in which the network interfaces are configured, in fcX world we have ifcfg-ethX files whereas in debian world everything has to be in a single interfaces file(i think it is called interfaces but not sure of the name). Again I am not saying one way is better than the other but just that they are *different*.
i agree that diversity is good in config software but i would really appreciate if all the distributions conformed to some kind of standard about where they would store the files internally. i would really **love** to experience the same backend for all the distributions and have different frontends….
Just quoting the authors clarification from the same rant site “Walt: I think you missed some of my points. My rant against the proliferation of multitudes of distributions is that they all decide to do things differently. I’m talking about basic, simple things like where in the filesystem they put key bits of software. Despite supposed standards (a couple of conflicting ones, anyway) many distributors just do it differently because they can, not for any good or compelling reason.

Ubuntu, for example, puts X modules in a different place than most current distros. Perhaps it’s a Debianism or a new standard everyone should follow. I honestly don’t know. I do know that with vanilla Ubuntu (or Kubuntu or Xubuntu) that you can’t do:

./configure

make

make install

for an X based app and have any prayer of it working unless you tell configure where to find things. Yes, configuration options can fix that issue. A newcomer won’t know that, will they?

GNewSense (it’s not GNUSense) would be a nightmare for the typical user coming over from Windows. It would put them off Linux, perhaps permanently, if their very normal hardware simply doesn’t work. It would be unusable in a corporate server farm as well. I see building a user base and gaining acceptance as more important than what Carla describes as hundreds of half-baked distros.

I don’t think you can extend my argument to window managers. I share your dislike for Gnome and KDE, though I do see KDE as probably the best choice for newcomers to Linux migrating from Windows provided they have a system with the necessary horsepower. My last two distro reviews covered Vector Linux 5.8 Standard (Xfce4 desktop) and Xubuntu Edgy Eft (also Xfce4 desktop).

The need for lightweight distributions for older hardware and corresponding lightweight applications and window managers is pretty well undisputed. My article (rant?) talks about “general purpose distributions”, not specialized ones with a distinct purpose not filled by Fedora or Ubuntu or Debian or SuSe. I also didn’t put a fixed number on how many distributions there should be. I just said a distro for the sake of yet another distro is a really bad idea, particularly when it breaks standards and makes the life of newcomers to Linux difficult.

FSF doesn’t believe that 99% free is free enough. They are ideologically driven. They don’t believe in having a choice to include or exclude proprietary software. They believe it is all evil. I just don’t share Richard Stallman’s view of the software world or all of his ideology. OK, maybe proprietary software is truly evil, but for now it remains a necessary evil. That, too, was one of my main points.
Caitlyn Martin | January 16, 2007 02:44 PM “

]]> By: antrix http://yavin4.anshul.info/2007/01/18/a-million-distros-bring-em-on/comment-page-1/#comment-4982 antrix Thu, 18 Jan 2007 01:33:47 +0000 http://yavin4.anshul.info/2007/01/18/a-million-distros-bring-em-on/#comment-4982 IMHO, your fourth point is perhaps the most significant one. IMHO, your fourth point is perhaps the most significant one.

]]>