On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Heinz Diehl htd@fritha.org wrote:
Better/equal in precisely what?
Well, now got the idea that work is being done very well in rpm distributions, so actually what I earlier asked, should not be asked. Anyways, I liked the rpm because at least all of my (noob's) work is smoothly done. Still I was curious only to know the people's view...
Better/equal in the sense of the time it takes. Also, sometimes, when some (or more) unneeded packages reside in the system, even when they are not used but they rest in the hard-disk. Okay well, they don't take much capacity, so I let them sleep always. But this happens in rpm based distros which I came to know.
...or why did this bifurcation took place if the Linux is only the kernel...?
Because there are different distributions which all think that their own package management system is most suited. There's more than one way to do it...
Oh I see. And this may be the same reason why even the typical distributions like Gentoo got evolved!
What kind of distribution somebody uses is a matter of taste, needs and other more or less subjective factors, and the package manager is a part of it.
Exactly true. Its more like the analogy of cars. Some people prefer Ford, some Chevrolet, others like Mercedes-Benz better, but ultimately they all have an engine that runs on fuel.
But I am happy with rpm now. I was a happy Fedora user and would eventually try it back, though currently running openSUSE 12.3 with the same happiness. I was even confused between the many distributions but came to understand the underneath strategy to install one and use it!
I regret that I don't get much time to learn such a wonderful technology of Linux!!
On Nov 22, 2013, at 2:01 AM, AP worldwithoutfences@gmail.com wrote:
Exactly true. Its more like the analogy of cars. Some people prefer Ford, some Chevrolet, others like Mercedes-Benz better, but ultimately they all have an engine that runs on fuel.
A better analogy that involves cars needs some additional detail: Different automakers put the driver's seat in different locations. Mercedes right front, Ford right rear, Chevy on the luggage rack, Jaguar in the trunk, etc.
And I say that because package management is a viciously nasty user experience. Once you've committed to learning one of them, you definitely don't want to learn how to use another one - assuming, you know, you actually have work to do rather than just screwing around with computers all day long, learning mindnumbing estoteric b.s like package managers.
And fuel in this analogy, is the linux kernel. The only thing they have in common is the kernel, which by all rights end users should be the least interested in or interact with.
I regret that I don't get much time to learn such a wonderful technology of Linux!!
I would rather gut myself than learn another package management system, even if I had the time. I just want a little icon to click on and maybe a button that says Install, because I actually care to spend time using the application I've gone to the effort to locate, rather than figuring out how to install, remove, or update it.
I wonder how many thousands of man hours are consumed maintaining the different packaging systems, and manually dealing with dependency conflict resolution. It must be insane.
Chris Murphy
Allegedly, on or about 22 November 2013, Chris Murphy sent:
A better analogy that involves cars needs some additional detail: Different automakers put the driver's seat in different locations. Mercedes right front, Ford right rear, Chevy on the luggage rack, Jaguar in the trunk, etc.
Going for the truly surreal analogy, were you? ;-)
On Nov 22, 2013, at 2:22 PM, Tim ignored_mailbox@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 22 November 2013, Chris Murphy sent:
A better analogy that involves cars needs some additional detail: Different automakers put the driver's seat in different locations. Mercedes right front, Ford right rear, Chevy on the luggage rack, Jaguar in the trunk, etc.
Going for the truly surreal analogy, were you? ;-)
Not really. Do you think you can functionally operate any package installer without reading its manual, once you've learned any other package manager?
If the different auto manufacturers were to design like linux package managers, well… that wouldn't even be possible because it would be ridiculous and they'd have gotten nowhere.
Chris Murphy
On 11/22/2013 01:41 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Not really. Do you think you can functionally operate any package installer without reading its manual, once you've learned any other package manager?
That depends. Are you referring to the CLI or the GUI version?
On Nov 22, 2013, at 2:59 PM, Joe Zeff joe@zeff.us wrote:
On 11/22/2013 01:41 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Not really. Do you think you can functionally operate any package installer without reading its manual, once you've learned any other package manager?
That depends. Are you referring to the CLI or the GUI version?
From a developer standpoint, the CLI matters as the guts of the packaging methodology affects them the most. From the user standpoint, it's a fair point you make, that a GUI abstracts the user from this. So in that sense, continuing the analogy, it may be the case the users are able to get along OK driving fundamentally different cars, but their mechanics are only going to work on specific car types.
But I feel that making things easier for developers is also good for users. But, case in point, Apple's packaging method gives me fits also, but fortunately as a user I don't have to use it, and even as a developer there are very robust GUI tools that abstract much of the work from me as well. So it really is a lot about the available tools.
However, there's the non-insignificant problem of "no packaged libraries" on most linux distros, which then breaks packages even on distros that use the same packaging method. And that sort of philosophy is more hostile to developers than to users, but as developers pick and choose where they develop, it has the effect of limiting user choice.
Chris Murphy
Tim:
Going for the truly surreal analogy, were you? ;-)
Chris Murphy:
Not really.
Surely, you couldn't have been anything but surreal... (With the driver's seat on the luggage rack or in the trunk.)
-
AP -
Chris Murphy -
Joe Zeff -
Tim