On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 11:25:50PM +1300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ok, everyone missed my point regarding static RPM's...it's the CHOICE 
> that matters.

I didn't miss the point.  It's a CHOICE that no-one cares about.  Who
would choose to install statically linked binaries when one could
install dynamically linked ones?  [ Your arugment about RPMs and
dependencies is not valid in answering this question.  urpmi solved
that problem. ]

> I didn't say to eliminate dynamically linked RPM's, just 
> add the static ones,

OK, go ahead.  Let us know when you are done.  I am sure we will all
be downloading them.  I personally would prefer Mandrake developers
doing something more useful with their time.

> so people have a choice.

Nobody wants the choice.

> And who cares about the extra 
> release size.

I do.  I don't want to have to stick 15 CDs into the drive to install,
and I also don't want to have to pay (yes, indeed, in some parts of
the world, bandwidth is paid for by the byte) for the download of
statically linked binaries. 

> If clients don't want it, they won't buy it, or download 
> it but who knows how popular this idea would be because no one has tried 
> it.

Uhm, dude.  Marketing.  A pruduent company would do market research
before embarking down a road such as this.

> Linux has always been about choice.  If a techie wants a lean mean 
> Linux Machine he isn't likely to be running Mandrake anyway as he/she 
> would have a preference for the command line and would usually care less 
> about all the GUI intensive stuff that Mandrake includes, because, as I 
> said, it's target market is mainly the desktop.

I don't see your point.  I am a techie and yes, I do want a lean mean
GUI running machine.  I don't care to waste the resources of my
hardware on silliness like static linking.  Command line does not
eliminate GUI.  xterm.

> I see everyone's point and it is well taken but answer yes or no, would 
> releasing statically linked versions of RPM's speed the uptake of Linux 
> on the desktop.

No.  Linux on the desktop has got less than nothing to do with static
binaries.

> I think if you all are honest, the answer is a 
> resounding yes.

Thanks for putting words in my mouth.  I am being honest and can tell
you, with 10+ years of experience working in the Linux/UNIX industry,
I can assure you, statically linked binaries is not what is holding
Linux back on the desktop.

> I for one would take a basic Mandrake install and then 
> add the extra software not included in the distro via static RPM's.  It 
> is probably more important for app developers to take this tack than a 
> whole distro but it bears thinking about...  I am for anything that will 
> help Linux grow in market share in every quarter, as long as it doesn't 
> dilute the basic principles of the OS, which this idea doesn't.

I don't think you really know what you are talking about.  You want
the Linux developers to waste time building static RPMs in one breath
than then you talk about dilution in another.  Wasting time building
useless static RPMs is a dilution of developer force.

b.


-- 
Brian J. Murrell

Reply via email to