I started a thread by asking if there were too many distros for Linux.

Now 69_rs_ss asked me : why Linux needs manpower ?
I would say :
-to correct bugs
-to improve code quality
-to improve code readability
-to optimize algorithms
-to have stable code
-to increase security
-to have standards
-to code guis and make it more user-friendly
-to make games
-to include enough libraries to avoid dependency issues
-to develop more drivers for hardware
-to test the code
-to do more advocacy and advertisement
etc.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...03/11/1/106629

Lack of Testing Threatening the Stability of Linux
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/lin...9195957,00.htm
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl...tid=163&tid=98


Lack Of Developers Delays OpenOffice.org
http://developers.slashdot.org/artic...&tid=102&tid=8
Interview : KOffice Team
http://www.freehackers.org/fosdem2002/koffice.html

The State of Multimedia Linux
http://lwn.net/Articles/23857/

Problems With the Firefox Development Process
http://developers.slashdot.org/devel...?tid=154&tid=8

So I am feeling that Linux is going nowhere.

I'm almost certain that a fascist statement like that
won't go down too well with the OSS ;}

Diversity and controversy are GOOD. Mono-cultures
bring problems: windows and it's 3 new viruses/torjans
a day, mono-cultures in agriculture and their dependence
on pesti-/fungi-/herbicides ... just a few examples.

And there's nothing wrong with that

And here you have a counting problem. I've successfully used
mplayer, xine, ogle and totem to watch DVDs, and each tool has
its strengths and weaknesses. And if you don't like any of them,
write a better one yourself.




Manpower: always
Central power: surely not

I didn't vote in the poll because I don't want the two
distinct things "man power" and "a powerfull man at
the top" to be even VAGUELY related.


Cheers,
Tink

yes: we need more converts!

and each distro has a package that is optimised for that distro. It makes running linux (the kernel) in the distro (the 'outer' bundle) so much smoother.

left leaning happy slacker here- I don't like rpms- the "buisness world" probably would force the standard to something similar, and even if there was a "standard" I bet there would be someone out there who would not follow it, to make a better version/for the heck of it.

titanium_geek

tinksters point: I didn't vote either, please clarify what you mean.

I am not against diversity.
But we need more standards, like :
-a universal package system.
-a universal environment (I would choose KDE)
-a universal software package
-a universal drivers package
-a universal linux installation system
-a universal filesystem (I would choose ext3)
etc.

Look : we have one Linux Kernel thanks to Linus.
Can you imagine Linux still existing with 1,000 kinds of kernels ?
Developers would go crazy...and Linux would have never been such a success.

Look at OpenBSD, they have one precise policy : they have the best code, the best security, the best stability around. Most of Linux distros are far behind OpenBSD.

If there are new ideas, then they can be tested on a peripheral distro.
But we need "hardcore distros", with universal and standards !
Kindof : "hardcore distros" and "peripheral distros".

Thats the problem : users get crazy because they dont know which product to choose.
Do you think people will search and try every existing product ? No you must be joking.
That's why Microsoft are wining on the desktop.
People look for simple and user-friendly systems.
Even if Linux is better written, it is not enough. Linux shouldn't be only for hackers but for everyone !
That's the main problem : hackers are staying in their little ghettos and are not enough open to the "real world".
Those nice hackers and code gurus say : look Linux is SOOOO good, SOOO marvelous.
And normal users say : yes but it is so complicated, it is not perfect, here are the bugs, the things to improve.
Do you really want that Linux being forever used by the same small number of people, the same hardcore hackers, the same small number of system admins ? Or do you want Linux to win everybody ? So it has to be more universal.

Why? Some people (I am one of them) actually believe
that package management systems are INHERENTLY
flawed since there'll always be packages that are
mutually exclusive.

Why? How does that blend in with an appreciation
of diversity?


Why? Statement is redundant, btw, is included in package
above?


What are you talking about? All drivers (except for some
non-OSSed ones) are part of the kernel, they don't come
packaged in any other means.


It's there. It's ./configure && make && make install.
All else is a matter of taste and can be handled as
such.


Why? I would chose Reiser or xfs, btw.


I can see at least 10 different patch-sets that are
widely used, and that's fine with me. I actually dislike
RedHat for their way of maintaining the kernel source.

And your point is? OpenBSD is not Linux, Linux grows
faster, more diverse, has better hardware support (I'm not
talking CPUs).


And I'm happy for the people who want a "friendly"
(I actually see that as a synonym for dumbing down,
condescending, ... ) system to stick with windows,
honestly, I have no problem with others using it.

French (the language) shouldn't be only for French(people)! But
it should be more like English so it's not so different for the English
people.

And your point is? The hackers improve their OS in their
own interest, to make it better suitable for their tasks. The "normal
user" (What's normal, btw? The average? If 90% of all people
had cancer, would that make cancer normal, or is it still some
undesirable sickness?) won't pay them anything, on the
contrary, they'll deride them as geeks and make demands
(can you imagine, as if they had ANY right) from them.

In all honesty I don't CARE about everybody. Everybody
is welcome to use it, everybody is welcome to learn and
I'll even help him, but everybody is bloody well not going
to tell me how to use my system.

GNU & Linux is about freedom, and an idiotokrati/agriokrati
is totally unacceptable.


Cheers,
Tink

You might, just MIGHT, be able get support for distros having a set of universal default installation choices, so that regardless of distro, a new linux user would always start out with a computer that, for e.g., booted into KDE and used ext3.

That might make it easier to give advice to newbies on how to get things working, because you'd know what they were working with. So long as there was a choice right at the start for this "Default installation" for newbies, and an "Advanced installation" for those of us who know what we're doing and can make our own decisions.

But that's about it.

The last thing I want on my PC is KDE - it's bloated, slow, and I have no use for it. You can keep your Desktop Environments - I just want a Windows Manager. If any linux distro told me I had to use KDE, I'd throw it in the bin and that would be the end of it.

That's not progress.

I also hate packages.
But packages "can be used" for big systems so you dont have to compile 100 times.
So if packaging is used, it would be good to find a universal solution for linux.

It would be good to propose a universal configuration.

I meant more drivers reckognized by the kernel.

I also wish it was so, but why isnt everyone using it, instead of bloady packages ?

This could be debated elsewhere : you may be right.

Linux choses the quantity and not the quality. Very bad choice.

Microsoft are already copying the open source quality.
Daniel Robbin who created Gentoo has joined them.
Soon Microsoft will kill Linux. First on users then on servers.
Goodbye Linux.

English didnt succeed because it is a better language.

You know there are normal users and there are geeks.

Thats the kind of mentality I really hate : "I dont care about everybody".
So stay in your "linux ghetto". And say Linux goodbye. Microsoft is here.
What is Linux with no users ? Nothing.

That's the goal .

That's likely to be true.
Then what do you propose as a universal desktop environment ?

Your running in circles, unfortunately not around
me ... ;) ... you can use rpm (or emerge or apt) and
I'll use tgz, if I can't use a tgz I'll use source. You
still haven't given a valid reason why there's a need
for a universal package management.

/me makes a mental note to self: "Hollow phrases improve with repetition"

Because some maintainers seem to be (along with
you!) of the opinion that it's easier for users NOT
to use source.

That's completely besides the point. You failed to explain
why ONE standard file-system would be better.

Both statements are debatable - but if you dislike Linux,
use OpenBSD ;)

So FUD requires unification? Sweet.


You didn't get the point. What I was trying to say is that
if I want to do something new i may have to learn it. It's
like when you hit 6 and move on from your scooter to
a bike, and then at 18 from the bike to the car. They don't
operate in the same way, you have to learn. Same applies
for OSes. Note: a computer is not a computer. :} A computer
without as OS is a paper-weight or a door-stopper. A computer
with a different OS is like a different vehicle - you need to
learn.

So I hear.

You weren't listening, and maybe you're confusing the
term anybody and everybody. I care about a lot of people
(otherwise I wouldn't bother spending my time here). And
I am happy in my ghetto as long as I don't have people
coming in an telling me to rebuild it differently. And I don't
see the no-users-problem that you're throwing about.

Again - not listening. There's NO likelihood or "likely
truth" involved what-so-ever. He's expressing his dislike
for a product he perceives as bloated (so do I, btw) .
The fact that he doesn't want KDE, and himself is using
FVWM2 doesn't mean that he believes it would be beneficial
for everyone else to use it, too. That's your idée fixe ;}

And despite the fact that you spent many words you
haven't delivered a single convincing argument that
would back it up, but I suppose that's a common problem
with those idée fixe, eh? On the contrary, you've started
to contradict yourself.


Cheers,
Tink

Hey, have you really read the first message of the thread ?
I recommend to use source.

You must be joking ? Ok then go using "fat" for linux LOL.

Thats no FUD, thats reality, Linux will be beaten by Microsoft and disapear, like before Amiga, etc.
The future :
For big systems ? Unix.
For users ? Microsoft.
For the 3 remaining crazy geeks ? an old linux version, since they are not updated anymore...

Sorry but each time I use a different car, I dont need to learn how to drive...

Cheers

I really don't care. Whatever it happened to be, it would be on the install path that I wouldn't use, so it makes no odds to me. I wouldn't use anything other than FVWM2, but anybody suggesting it be made a universal default would be out of their mind.

Gnome would probably be best, as it doesn't have the restrictions that I gather KDE does on its use. That's unless people decided that DEs were bad default install choices as they take up so much space, and a simple WM like Blackbox should be the default. Although that could confuse the poor newbie who's used to lots of icons and taskbars to get around. . .

Of course I did, and again: repeating it doesn't make it true
or a problem. Btw, MDK and RH is not the extension of their
packages, they're still both rpm.

Well, maybe instead of posting FUD here you should wander
off and exploit your clairvoyance in more profitable ways.

As far as I have observed the trends in IT over the last few
years Linux is on the rise, big-time, and not only in the server
market, but also on desktops.

That's possibly true (to quote you). But you will have to
learn when you move from your scooter to a car. M$ is
easy to use, and gives you the illusion of power (like
a scooter). Linux is a tank. Again, you weren't listening,
misquoting my parabola.

And (I'll put your visions aside, I don't consider them proof)
I still haven't seen a good reason for all the claims you make.


Cheers,
Tink

The point you appear to be missing is:
None of those things get affected by the number of distros.

If I fix a bug in, say, Xorg, on my Gentoo box, that patch can then be applied to every Xorg on every distro.

Distros are just slightly different ways of organising things. Source code is universal, you can improve it from any distro.

None of your examples are affected by distro numbers. That's why you're having such a hard time with your argument. Whether you're using Debian, Gentoo, Suse, Fedora, Slackware, or whatever, you're still using Linux. And that's all that matters.

OK let Blackbox be the default Desktop

I know, but I quoted the words of someone else.

Pfffffffffff it is a dying trend.
I have no friend who uses Linux because they think it is complicated and games dont work on it. Some have tried it and given it up.
Since XP is so stable, they all gave linux up and are not willing to go back to it.
The only people I know knowing a little about linux are computer science students, and programmers or IT professionals . That's not much of a people !!!!
In all the different companies where I worked, they never used linux or unix, but window 2000 or nt or xp for clients. And Unix for servers.
So I am seeing linux nowhere... and I am having linux because I am not a "normal person".

Yes but :
- making new distros instead of improving gnu/linux is a waste of time.
- look at red hat how they use the linux kernel ?
After this discussion, I am more and more willing to do my own universal distro. I dont know if I have a chance to get it done. Will it be a waste of time ?
Ok then building linux from scratch would be even more universal, but it is quite elitist.

If you didnt read this before, I rewrite it for you :
Then why having so many distros if it is the SAME AND ONE Linux ?

It's the same linux kernel. The distro is gnu with a linux kernel, together gnu/linux. Every distro has sort of a vision and is different from another just for diversity. Linux is the same, it's the kernel the distros simply have different priorities and visions.

Yes true

Linux is the kernel. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very few developpers
GNU/Linux is the OS. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a little more
A distro contains the OS + customizations + applications. >>> many developpers

So the manpower is much diluted in the distros.