Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
Debian 3.1 bloated my NAT-box
toadlife:
--- Quote from: ksym ---Im just curious ...
why don't people complain about FreeBSD:s BSD init system? =)
LOL OSS coders are all a bunch of wannabe-gurus who mock each other just to gain some respect =)
--- End quote ---
They DO! ;)
I've seen countless people post thigns like ... I prefer _x to FreeBSD cause' I like it's init system over FreeBSD's.
ksym:
--- Quote from: toadlife ---They DO! ;)
I've seen countless people post thigns like ... I prefer _x to FreeBSD cause' I like it's init system over FreeBSD's.
--- End quote ---
HAHA :D
So my theory about OSS coders being mostly childish wannabe-gurus is mostly true ;)
BTW I like your signature. It shows how blind most GNU/Linux users are. They just don't see faults in their platform, and if you tell them about it (eg. GNU userland breaking ABI too often) they just mark you as an "INFIDEL" and make some excuses.
Eg. when you said that nVidia crashed your BSD 6, then a GNU/Linux guy would not have even mentioned such. Sigh.
piratePenguin:
Maybe we aren't blind. Maybe we just could not give a fuck, because our systems _are_ running brilliantly and because the problems you describe and over-hype matter little to us because of that.
ksym:
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---Maybe we aren't blind. Maybe we just could not give a fuck, because our systems _are_ running brilliantly and because the problems you describe and over-hype matter little to us becuase of that.
--- End quote ---
That is the problem of the current GNU/Linux scene. People just don't give a fuck. And so, they are blind.
Ever tried to make a binary distribution of a software so, that it works in all distributions? It is hard, this I can tell you. I have friends who make proprietary software for GNU/Linux (middleware mostly), and they constantly get frustrated with the fact that there are no widely accepted standards.
Glibc constantly breaks ABI in either stdc++ or other subcomponents, there are no standard versioning schemes for library components ... so one needs to include ALL libraries except glibc with the app, and hope that glibc will stay stable for about 2 years till next release of the app is considered.
Make me a Gnome/KDE GUI app that works out-of-the-box with 5 biggest distributions, and I will reconsider my opinins.
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: ksym ---That is the problem of the current GNU/Linux scene. People just don't give a fuck. And so, they are blind.
--- End quote ---
I repeat:
Maybe we aren't blind. Maybe we just could not give a fuck, because our systems _are_ running brilliantly and because the problems you describe and over-hype matter little to us because of that.
I guess it's like in politics, whenever the economy is running "brilliantly", not many people give a crap who's in government. And when the economy is in ruins, they turn to extremists or someone else.
Right now, things are working for us. And they're working well.
--- Quote from: ksym ---Ever tried to make a binary distribution of a software so, that it works in all distributions? It is hard, this I can tell you. I have friends who make proprietary software for GNU/Linux (middleware mostly), and they constantly get frustrated with the fact that there are no widely accepted standards.
--- End quote ---
You could say that the standard way for developers to distribute packages in the free software world is in the form of source tarballs.
Doesn't the firefox installer work on most/all distributions? And vmware?
--- Quote from: ksym ---Make me a Gnome/KDE GUI app that works out-of-the-box with 5 biggest distributions, and I will reconsider my opinins.
--- End quote ---
Take a look around. GAIM. Rhythmbox. The GIMP. Et cetera.
They work on all (not only the top five) GNU/Linux distributions, and some even work on other operating systems, including Windows (which isn't UNIX-like).
I believe we have an unbeatable standard for distributing software here.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version