On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 03:18:41PM -0200, Xtian Xultz wrote:
> I disagree with you. A lot of other programs have packages for the distros
> the
> people uses, I think that is the best way...
For something to be usable on distro two conditions must be met:
1) the distro must work
2) the program must have package.
I have tried several distros and have had bad experience. I am using
hand-compiled system and have good experience. To me it looks like the
condition (1) is never met.
The problem of distros is they are another layer of bugs between possibly
perfect program and a user that does possibly perfectly what he's supposed to
do.
Debian try 1: segfaults and internal errors of install CDROM so dense I didn't
manage to proceed in installation
Debian try 2: install CDROM crashed on unability to process some (it's own)
kernel modules
Gentoo:
1) complete system self-destruct after emerge -u portage (gcc stopped working,
portage stopped working)
2) gentoo-specific patched kernel 2.6.9 hangs on serial port traffic + console
switching
Fedora core 3: GTK is installed wrong in the system
NULL distribution: happily, quickly, securely and stably running
Cl<
>
>
> Em Qui 30 Dez 2004 15:25, John Eaton escreveu:
>
> > So gEDA requires that your system has package Foo installed. Your distro
> > has Foo but
> > it is kept in a different location than the default used by Foo's
> > developers. gEDA installs
> > and runs ok.
> >
> > One year later there is a new gEDA that requires the latest rev of Foo.
> > Your original won't
> > work. So you grab the latest foo from foo.org, install it and wonder why
> > the new gEDA
> > still complains that you have the older version of Foo and won't run.
> >
> > Typical day in the life of anyone that does system administation but
> > this will stop an end user
> > ( note: I refuse to use the term luser) in their tracks. So if gEDA
> > needs Foo then why not
> > compile it into the geda apps. Quit worring about being frugal will
> > system resources at the
> > expense of system admin time. We have plenty of disc space, ram and cpu
> > cycles. Sys admin
> > time is the bottleneck that we must develop to minimize. Linux is so
> > flexible that the number
> > of possible system configs is enourmous. You can't cover all of them.
> > You must design software
> > that will work with any of them.
> >
> > John Eaton
> >
> > Karel Kulhavy wrote:
> > >>Free Software means never having to say "now what do I do" when your
> > >> closed source vendor goes belly up.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>A "dummies guide to gEDA" would be nice but a lot of the problem is
> > >>related to the flexible nature of linux.
> > >>With that other OS where you know exactly what is available in the user
> > >>enviroment but in linux you have no
> > >>idea if the user's distro has the needed libs or not.
> > >
> > >It is necessary to write:
> > >a) What are the gEDA's requirements on the system
> > >b) How do I test if my system fullfills them (step-by-step guide)
> > >c) How do I convert non-compliant system into a compliant one
> > > (step-by-step guide)
> > >d) How do I install gEDA on compliant system (step-by-step guide)
> > >e) Where to report bugs when some of the step-by-step guides doesn't work.
> > >
> > >With these informations provided to user, installing gEDA will
> > > unconditionally work.
> > >
> > >Write in human brain code, not philosophical essays. Ronja is written in
> > >human brain code (it's even transaction oriented - there is a box you read
> > >where the step is described, then you hit box boundary, commit the
> > > transaction, cross the box on printout with a pencil and move over to
> > > another. This prevents execution of half the box) and it works well.
> > >
> > >>Locating,downloading and installing a bunch of different
> > >>programs is daunting for a end user. One solution would be to simply
> > >
> > >When there's a step-by-step guide, it isn't daunting, because the user
> > > even doesn't have to think about what he's doing.
> > >
> > >Cl<
