Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX

Why are Linux programmers so damn lazy?

<< < (3/3)

Orethrius:

--- Quote from: Calum ---i might as well just use any verb or noun i feel like it whenever i want!
--- End quote ---

You mean you haven't been?  *jab jab* :D

 

--- Quote ---anyway, i'm off to hoover my bananas, now, so i hope you can winkle your ovens, and try not to artichoke any squash pilchards! :D
--- End quote ---

Oh, right, make a joke to draw our attention from the fact!  Bastard.  :p

Kintaro:

--- Quote from: ShawnD1 ---It's a common argument that Linux is needlessly complicated when trying to install things. The problem with this argument is that it's not a problem with Linux as an OS, it's a problem with lazy ass programmers who make software for Linux. Most software for Linux must be installed by compiling the code yourself (which can take upwards of hours), then installing using a command that's 10 line long. Why do programmers do this? Why is it so god damn hard to install most Linux software? Mozilla and Opera for Linux are simple binary programs that install much like Windows programs. It takes almost no time and it's so easy that my grandma can probably do it. We know that Linux can be made easy; easy to install programs already exist.

Is there any foreseeable reason for programmers to only release the source, make you compile it yourself, then make you install it using a command that can't even fit on one line?
--- End quote ---


Step 1: get a distro.
Step 2: Install apt-get
Step 3: Learn how to use it (fucking easy infact).

noob:
i think there needs to be a standard for installing software. like a file in /usr that tellt installers how to install. then, either the distros or users can put the file in and then installers written for that method will work.

Calum:
well, the LSB attempts to standardise components of a linux distro, and they specify that a distro must be able to use rpms in the normal way. this has two or three problems: 1: distros just have to support rpm, not use it by default, meaning slack, debian et cetera have to use --force and --nodeps frequently to install rpms (thus making the whole thing pointless) 2: rpms aren't necessarily better than other package management systems (and there are quite a few, in my opinion the debian approach is the best) and 3: rpm was developed by red hat, and then embraced and extended by others, it's not so much that its incompatible per se, it's just that rpms for one system often won't install properly or ca't be used properly when installed on other systems (like red hat rpms on a mandrake machine, mandrake rpms on a suse machine et cetera ad nauseum).

however i think the LSB will and should get tighter as time goes on, and more distros will fall in line, this will be a good thing, since the newbs can stick with those LSB compliant distros (of which there are currently NONE to my knowledge) and they will know they can move on with more confidence once they are comfortable.

choasforages:
a decent database oriented filesystem like beos would make most of this cross compatability a non issue

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page