Jump to content
Gowator

What is wrong with Linux?

Recommended Posts

Im afriad I agree on the bottom line...

 

they would rather you pay for a bad experience than have a free good experience....

 

OK maybe thats harsh but they forget they also OWE FLOSS/openSource etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see how someones util not being included in linuxconf means linuxconf breaks itself :unsure:

 

The point is that if mdk, and suse turned over their config tools to linuxconf to be unbiasly integrated, we'd have tools that actually work, and work on all linux's ;) Same with Webmin...it'd all be in one place....the way it should be.

 

....but then how could they justify charging you $60+ for it? :P ....

...back to the bottom line.

The point is that his utility is not included. It is that the creator is very slow to respond to him, probably due to the workload, or something else. That person actually tried to hack linuxconf in order to put his utility in, but found out that the code is pretty messy so he needed the creator's help. And no, he never gotten the help.

 

You see, if linuxconf creator is very late in responding to people's requests, even to improve his/her own utility, how much work do you think he/she can do in improving his utility. Linux is moving very fast, even for me. Just for the change to kernel 2.6 alone creates new config files. Even staying in one kernel have many choices for many things, like alsa or OSS for sound driver? Using autodetection or sndconfig? Regular XFree module or proprietary module for video card? Sendmail or postfix for email server? Proftpd or wuftpd for ftp server, and so on. Heck, I found out that changing dhcpd version can render your old configuration file useless (even break the whole system) while I was trying to put RedHat 7.2's config file into RedHat 9.0. And that's just for dhcpd. I don't know any additional options in Samba now that it changes to version 3.x.

 

I agree that there should be a standard way of where the files are located. But there shouldn't be one configurator for all distros. If that's the way it is, what is the difference between one distro and another other than the packages installed. Heck.. it's getting harder to see the difference between different distros nowadays since KDE is KDE and OO.o is OO.o no matter what distro it is installed in. Mandrake tools and YAST are what makes Mandrake and Suse different from each other.

 

Anyway, linuxconf used to be THE configurator for RedHAT, but even RedHat moved on to something else. It is not for the better since Redhat's configurators are even worse than Linuxconf, but if RedHat changes their configurator to something else, you can see how bad linuxconf has become in terms of keeping up with the changes in linux world.

 

Whoa.. that's a long response. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not convinced

perhaps RH changed for the same reason as MDK and Suse to lock in users!

 

The pôint is the code was open and RH and MDK were using it

There doesnt need to be a single configurater just standard files and standard places...

 

but Ill go farther....

the config files for KDE should go here KDE says ... not messed about by people with a lot less technical expertise like Mandrake...

building a distro requires a lot less effort than writing KDE... which also runs on many non linux *nix variants

(this is equally valid for gnome etc...)

 

unfortunately distro manufs mess about take dragonmages problem with dhcp-server-3

 

if the config files were left as they should be then webmin would have resolved this but Mandrake has to mess with thqt too and disable parts that duplicate (or usually exceed) mandrakes own tools.

 

The point is it should be up to hardware manufacturers to write drivers but they cant while there is no standard way to do this..

 

just look at XF86Config where nvidias installer doesnt know how to edit it in case its messed about by yast or hard drake...

 

I just finished installing Suese 9.1 pro (64bit) except it doesnt work...

worse it wont let me fix it...

XF86Config has a big warning not to edit by hand and to use some graphical tool excep thte tool finds the wrong refresh on my monitor and hangs...

 

Any tool that prevents a user modifying a config file like this is crap...

there is no way it can hope to write a better file automatically than me by hand... how will it know I intend to connect a projector with widescreen ratios... nope this just dumbs it down....

 

All Mandrake wizards are crap and always will be because they can never do a job better than an experienced technician by hand...for just the reason dragonmage said... because what if you change to a later dhcp server...

 

iof this was webmin then its up to the dhcp server team to write another module and an update for webmin.. but they cant be expected to write it for yast, debconf and MDK wizards et al not to mention some stupid sounding spells!!!

 

 

this is OK so long as they allow the technician to edit them without FUBARing the whole system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that there should be a standard way of where the files are located. But there shouldn't be one configurator for all distros. If that's the way it is, what is the difference between one distro and another other than the packages installed.

now you got it ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that there should be a standard way of where the files are located.

I believe there is, unless it has already been mentioned... :cheesy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that there should be a standard way of where the files are located.

I believe there is, unless it has already been mentioned... :cheesy:

No afaik it doesn't had been mentioned before in this thread.

It should: thanks to be the first one.

 

Mission Statement

 

To develop and promote a set of standards that will increase compatibility among Linux distributions and enable software applications to run on any compliant system. In addition, the LSB will help coordinate efforts to recruit software vendors to port and write products for Linux.

 

Isn't what we were talking about ?

Is Mandrake Linux LSB compliant ?

what is LSB legitimacy ?

Edited by roland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lsb-standard standardizes some of this ..

 

the filesystem-standard:

http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html

 

I haven't tried it, but like you might have seen, there are packages for this in Mandrake under the developper->lsb - branch.

 

It seems that rpm is becoming a standard packaging system. I'm still a newbie in packaging and can eb wrong, but there are some things I would like to see in a packaging-system that isn't present in rpm as far as I know at the moment, or not easy to do. I'm going to explore other packaging system and see how they work.

 

Here is the latest standard: http://www.linuxbase.org/modules.php?name=...e/LSB-Core.html

 

It can be that it isn't finished yet.

 

someone beat me to this I see :) or how do you say this in English.

Edited by Michel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what is LSB legitimacy ?

Linux From Scratch is the closest I've seen. In the build they tell you when and what, giving you the opition to....or not to hold to LSB :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep but this seems to be running before we can walk? (IMHO)

 

Some simple ethos might be easier to explain!

 

For instance

1) config tools should only change the config files which are used as standard with a package and in the original position of the package maintainer

2) config tools should respect changes by hand

3) config tools should have a backup option

4) config files should list all files modified

 

 

All standard (LSB) packages must define the location of all config/lock and PID files.

 

 

what I mean by this is there should be a httpd.conf and it should be in /etc/httpd/conf (presuming its apache... ) and further it should use by default /var/www/html as initial DocumentRoot and /var/lock/httpd.lock as the lock file and .....

 

i.e. whatever apache say.....

 

sometimes I get the idea that RH/Suse/MDK are bullying software writers to include their software.

that is for instance (my favorite or least favorite example being shorewall)

they have a perfectly good product and its simple to install except Mandrake kinda misuse it. Not really badly but enough to make the documentation from shorewall useless and enough to give a bad impression of shorewall to many....

 

Now i presume they are just happy to have it used in such a popular distro but at the same time it would be nice that MDK cant bully them ...

 

Im sure this is just one example.... and that suese and RH are as bad...

its actually something I respect debian for....

 

there will never be official deb packages for certain software (like qmail) becuase the license is incompatible with deb's license...

 

but both of them maintain there integrity ......

qmail's license states WHERE qmail's files may be placed and limits the packaging of it without permission...

deb presumably dont like the suggested locations for qmail's files so thats it they dont include it.... thats fine, becuase if you want t to run it then you just download and compile the tarball. That being the programmers intent in the first place.

 

I often wonder what started the RH/KDE war.... and i have a feeling it was nothing to do with the Qt license.... and a lot to do with KDE not rolling over for RH....and comprimising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good topic with lots of different views, but I think one point no one has really mentioned is why Mdk/RH/Suse keep adding more tools and doing things "their own way" versus staying purely within standards/guidelines. I think it's a simplification to say they are just looking for "vendor lock-in" and to some point what they are doing can be viewed as altruistic.

 

Linux is prepared to turn a corner over the next couple years, and it's finally getting the respect it deserves in corporate computing. I consult and have seen a steady increase in Linux solutions over the last few years, and things haven't really slowed down due to SCO's overtures, so I think this shows Linux building toward some level or critical mass.

 

The support and driver issues has less to do with the number of distros and their specific tweaks than it does with pure market share numbers. The vast majority of hardware lacks Mac support as well, the less software a hardare mfg has to test, the better in their minds. As for stuff like ISPs, they can barely support Windows and a really simple wizard/GUI tool is the only hope in that space. The only way to achieve critical mass in that space is for AOL to release a client for Linspire and market it as an Web,eMail/word processor that doesn't have worms/viruses, then every ISP would get on board. Until then, it's up to simple to use wizards and community support.

 

When Mdk tweaks a setting with a wizard, or Yast does something differently than Linuxconf or Red Hat changes a directory location I don't think it's because all of these Open Source supporters have suddenly turned greedy and have machinations of building a Redmond-style empire, I think they believe they have a truly better way of handling a task. The one thing all 3 of these distros have in common is that they are at the forefront of the battle to get on to the corporate desktop. Even a few more small victories in this space are crucial for Linux to reach that tipping point. While you and I can sit all day and debate and extoll the merits of "Free as in speech" and staying pure to the GNU/Linux ideas, the pointy headed bosses of the world are actually interested in things like wizards and simple configuration tools, they feel better signing some kind of maintenance agreement for thousands of $$$ than relying on the community that you and I know is out there working to solve an issue faster than any corporate entity. Those same pointy headed bosses have lunch with Microsoft sales people, and I can tell you after years of exposure to these guys, they are extremely good, they are heavily trained to get the sale at any cost with high profile clients and are authorized to give away the farm to fight Linux, and they know all the classic FUD and have back up plans for every counter measure we have.

 

Now the first thing we all have to acknowledge is that many of the people who hold the authority to turn Linux loose in the corporate space are clearly not qualified to make that decision. They are mostly non-technical, administrative types who are very comfortable in the world of point and click. This won't get better any time soon, so what to do? I think Mdk/RH/Suse are working on that, and while they don't always stay true to the letter of what Linux is on every level, they are tyring to find that balance between adherence to standards and a level of ease of use that will work for the PHBs of the world. Linux will enter most peoples homes the same way Windows did, after they have been exposed to it via work experience. I'd like to see how many people who work for AutoZone, Burlington Coat Factory or Ernie Ball have now tried and love Linux due to that exposure (anyone ever ask this question?).

 

So while I also get frustrated that Mdk/RH/Suse don't always "act like they should" I also see why they are pushing those boudaries (sometimes to the breaking point), but at their core, they are all still Linux. We all sit here and talk about how Mandrake, Red Hat and Suse aren't playing fair but those 3 ditros have the best chance of breaking into the corporate space and have done more to put the work Linux on the lips of PHBs than any other ditros you can name.

 

And while yes, I do believe that they are looking for thier tools to become the "preferred" way to do thing, thereby gaining more corporate support, therefore selling more lucrative and expensive support contracts, I don't think you could call this "lock in". This isn't MS software, you still have the source code, the same base line Linux kernel and the same community support. If you decide to base your business on Suse, convert your apps and sign a three year service agreement with Novell/Suse you are in no worse position if during that 3 years you decide that you aren't happy and switch distros next time around. You may have to tweak things, re-write some programs and your admins may have to brush up on the new version, but it's not nearly as traumatic or expensive as upgrading to a new version of Windows/Office/SQL/Great Plains and should be a smoother transition since your data is just as portable.

 

I'm not recommending that Mdk/Suse/RH be given charter to wreak havock on the file system, standard apps, etc... In fact, I think we should continue to vocally encourage them to adhere to standards. But I don't think it's realistic to assume we won't see more "vendor specific" tweaking in the near future. That doesn't necessarily mean these companies are evil or that everything they do has ill intentions . I think we will have to remain flexible and and supportive (as well as vocally critical when necessary) as Linux moves further into the mainstream, but I also think we inch closer to that critical mass every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice points xbob and welcome :D

 

You make a lot of good professional points so Ill pick those first for further expansion...

 

The 'prefered' method etc. are becoming more pervasive. XF86config in Suse comes with a wanring not to modify it and use some GUI tool ? (kina hard if your logged in remotely) but anyway...

 

say we do a 3 yr Novel/Suse contract we might prefer RH on some servers, indeed some of out software vendors might insist. therefore we would end up with a mixed system....

this is of course a nightmare to support but doub;ly so becuase the config tools used by button monkeys in one are noyt the same as button monkeys in another.

 

So thats OK, its linux after all.... we can just edit the config files can't we !

 

Well, yes and no.... lets say the suse DHCP client doesnt like the version of the RH DHCP server.,,, or 1001 possibilities then we have forgone the generalist sysad being able to look across diverse systems....

 

some of these are as different as Solaris and AIX or IRIX... many SGI adms use hinv to look at the swap useage whereas solaris adms might grep on dmesg! while the AIX adm is looking at /proc

 

this is an old problem but one linux shoiuldnt seek to inherit....

 

Redhat is as different to slack as it is to BSD... or Solaris almost.

except Solaris can still be administrated via webmin ....etc.

 

GUI noobie tools are fine if that is what they wanna sell but they shouldnt be used as a lock-in weapon....

 

On marketshare,

Desktop OS-X is <5% or so about the same as Linux but you will see far more OS-X complient stuff than linux...

 

Imagine why palm don't bother to make an pilot interface ??

It cant be cos us linx guys and gals arent geeky enough, its becuase they would need different instructions on any and every distro....

 

so the best way they can integrate is via gnome or kde... (which cuts down the options)

 

 

Much as I dont see Novel/MDK/suse dominating the world in the same way as redmond i do think they could actually work together a bit better!

 

It seems mainly a matter of pride to make their own quirky tools and not use the opensource oines already available (apt for RH being an exception):D

 

The problem is really that infighting in a distro wrecks this too.

I can imagine someone in MDK fighting for shorewall as a nice firewall but then someone else wants a ICS wizard like winBlows...

 

before you know where you are the original purpose of something is lost and its tied up inside some other wizard. Compare this to say developing in .asp or MS Access ... yep it starts off looking good quick but the deeper you look it just looks more like a dirty hack!

 

 

This is why a 3rd party like LSB needs to enforce standards on certain things (like conf files must be hand editable)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The 'prefered' method etc. are becoming more pervasive.  XF86config in Suse comes with a wanring not to modify it and use some GUI tool ? (kina hard if your logged in remotely) but anyway...

Agreed, and this is the kind of thing I think we should remain vocal about, if I can't edit the config by hand the tool sucks.

 

or 1001 possibilities then we have forgone the generalist sysad being able to look across diverse systems....

Also agreed, I think MS has been working hard to kill off the whole "generalist" idea and Linux distros shoud not assist with this.

 

this is an old problem but one linux shoiuldnt seek to inherit....

Agreed, but I don't see it as being avoidable on some level, perhaps if United Linux and IBM all came out behind LSB, but I don't see any of the major "corporate targeted" distros getting behind this if they think their tool will give them a leg up.

 

On marketshare, Desktop OS-X is <5% or so about the same as Linux but you will see far more OS-X complient stuff than linux...

 

Imagine why palm don't bother to make an pilot interface ?? 

It cant be cos us linx guys and gals arent geeky enough, its becuase they would need different instructions on any and every distro.... 

 

so the best way they can integrate is via gnome or kde... (which cuts down the options)

I think Linux usage now surpasses OS X usage, but not by much, but still. As for your Palm example, unless something has changed recently, Palm decided to not include OS X support on new products, also passing the buck on that support to the community, unless this has changed. Lowering develpement cost by targeting the majority is the rule MS has always wanted, so increasing marketshare for Linux is the only solution.

 

As for the KDE/Gnome integration, if you want mass Linux acceptance, there is going to have to be some level standardization of desktop/window managers on distributions if you hope to achieve critical mass. You can pro and con them to death, but both are good transition points for Windows users. There is no reason you can't have a 1,000 options for other window managers, but both support and users need some place to start, and KDE and Gnome are good choices.

 

i do think they could actually work together a bit better! 

Agreed again.

 

This is why a 3rd party like LSB needs to enforce standards on certain things (like conf files must be hand editable)

Again, totally agree. I stand behind what I said, we need to remain vocal and vigilent, but distros are going to keep looking for that leg up, so much like KDE vs Gnome, the debate will never end. Does anyone have information on which distros try to adhere to and actively support LSB? What actions have been taken to let Mandrake, Suse and Red Hat know how much this means to the community and to the future of Linux?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does anyone have information on which distros try to adhere to and actively support LSB?
I agree that there should be a standard way of where the files are located.

I believe there is, unless it has already been mentioned... :cheesy:

 

 

http://www.freestandards.org/modules.php?n...=showpage&pid=4

Community and Industry Support

The Free Standards Group is backed by industry leaders, including: Caldera, Conectiva, Debian, Dell, Hewlett Packard, Hitachi, IBM, Miracle Linux, The Open Group, Oracle, Red Hat, Sun, SuSE and TurboLinux, as well as members of the free and open source software development community.

 

All standards produced by the Free Standards Group are available for free and are distributed under open source licenses.

 

The Free Standards Group thus fulfills a critical need to have common behavioral specifications, tools and APIs that make it easier to develop applications across Linux distributions -- and rely on Linux as a major platform for IT solutions.

it's all there

 

Notice: Mandrake-9.0 was the last :unsure:

I'm not wasting my time writting mandrake. They've already shown us what they think about 'community' and it's opinion, they've read here where I stand, and this board is evidence of just how wrong they are. Lets not hear praises of their new, release schedule with a CE [*cough RC] please pay to be our test rats, either :cheeky:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep reread it....

 

This is kinda cool becuase we seem to actually be getting somewhere....

now if only we can let the distros know......

 

but like xbob pointed out earlier, if this is what IT managers want then the distros will use it as a discriminator. The problem is to get this to business decision makers before they get the FUD from MS.

 

but its been a healthy thread, its given me a whole loada justifications next time this comes up at work.... keep t rolling !

 

My Suse experience contiunues to be dissapointing, mainly becuase Im spoiled by urpmi/apt/emerge but equally Im just lost in the Yast crusade.

 

 

 

Lets not hear praises of their new, release schedule with a CE [*cough RC] please pay to be our test rats, either

 

Yep here is the problem, how to let MDK know we dont like this *well I dont* etc.

Im not buying powerpacks anymore because of this and a few other reasons but I want to tell em WHY..... they seem to make feedback very difficult!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...