On Mon, 31 Jan 2000, Thomas Charron wrote:
>> Linux also supports the idea of having multiple versions of shared
>> libraries installed at once, something Windows (so far) cannot do.
>
> Woah there, Nelly.. Windows supports the same sort of shared library
> support that Linux does.
Read it again. :) Linux allows you to have multiple versions of the *same
library* installed. The dynamic loader (ld.so) figures out which version of,
for example, libqt a program needs and gives it that one. MS-Windows cannot
do this. You can have only *one* version of (e.g.) COMCTL32.DLL installed at
a time.
> The same DLL hell can be encountered under Linux with shared libraries.
> Case in point, many development installs install the libs to
> /usr/local/lib, while RPM distro's install them to /usr/lib. The most
> frequent occurence I've seen of this is multiple copies of Gtk. ;-P
That isn't DLL Hell. DLL Hell occurs because you've got 50 different
programs, each of which wants their *own* favorite version of some system
library, and each of which installs it in the \WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ folder.
Sooner or latter you encounter a conflict between two programs, where they
both can't be on the same system at the same time because their shared
libraries conflict.
As far as multiple libraries installed on the same Linux system at the same
time, if ld.so is properly configured, it shouldn't matter to applications at
runtime. Now, you can run into *compile time* problems because an application
needs version X of library Y, but finds version Z first. I am told that GNU's
autoconf package can handle this if used properly.
> I disagree. They do, but don't *KNOW* they do. They *do* add printers,
> and applications. That's something that isn;t really taken into
> consideration. All of those silly settings people set, from their fonts
> to their sounds, is system maintenance.
Okay, fine. All of those things are easy under Linux as they are under
MS-Windows, assuming you have the software installed. Same as for MS-Windows.
I'm not going to bother picking your examples apart unless someone wants me
to.
> Nope, but in newer versions, you can just point it to where the install
> is, and check the box letting you use that as your new default location.
> They changed it, but they didn't KNOW they did..
You're missing the *point*. :) The example I used isn't important -- the
point is that the user knows nothing about system internals. People point to
Linux and say it's hard to use because the system internals are complex. But
that applies to MS-Windows as well. I picked an example -- the registry. A
user doesn't know nor care about that. The same applies to Linux. If someone
(e.g., VA Linux) pre-installs the OS and GUI for them, they don't know nor
care about the system internals.
> Ordinary desktop users have no idea of this type of concept, nor do they
> *really* need it. Their CAR doesn;t ask them who they are when they want
> to drive it, and neither do they expect their computer to require a
> different set of keys to do one thing then the other..
Funny you should choose that example. Ever heard of a valet key? It is a
key you give to the guy who parks your car. It opens the door and starts the
car, but it won't open the trunk or the glove compartment. So, yes, their car
*does* have a different set of keys to do one thing and the other.
Use that analogy for computers. Modifying the system's software
configuration should require a specific transition to a privileged state.
Otherwise, the careless user can easily destroy their own system by accident.
You protect the system from damage this way.
And I would *definitely* say users need this. All you have to do is look at
the huge problem viruses are on MS-Windows to see that.
> *A* registry, and *THE WIN32 REGISTRY* are two different things. I'm
> unsure of *WHY* there is this sort of confusion. And a registry doesn't
> HAVE to be setup as poorly as Microsofts..
Possibly because you insist on using a term that refers to a specific
instance (the MS-Windows "registry") for a general thing ("configuration
data"). Microsoft created a configuration database and called it "the
registry". If you use that term to mean something else, expect confusion. :)
--
Ben Scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
