On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Tom Rauschenbach wrote:
> I do know that trying to work with two different distros at the same time
> is enlightening. Linux needs some standardization badly.
No, *you* need some standardization badly. If you want Linux to be the same
on all your computers, then you should install the same distro of Linux on all
your computers. :-)
<SOAPBOX>
Linux is about freedom and choice. That includes the freedom to do things
differently. One of the things that makes Open Source/Free(dom) Software work
is that such software accepts the fact that one size does not fit all, and
that different people want to do things different ways.
People have to realize that Linux is not traditional commercial software.
That means that, among other things, you can do things however the heck you
want. You have the choice of using a uniform distribution, but you also have
the choice of doing something else.
I hear people complain that the commercial world needs standardization. Well,
that is fine by me -- but it is the commercial world that needs that
standardization, and not Linux.
This is why I do not get upset when I see some commercial vendor saying they
support "Red Hat Linux" or "SuSE Linux" or whatever. A commercial vendor,
especially a closed-source vendor, cannot reasonably be expected to support
just "Linux". That isn't the world they live in. They need to develop, test,
compile, document, and train in a standard environment. Companies like Red
Hat, SuSE, Caldera, et. al., give them that environment. The commercial world
can work out a solution for which distro(s) do(es) that best. If Red Hat ends
up being the de facto commercial Linux, then that is fine by me -- I don't use
Linux for the commercial software. I happen to use Red Hat at home because I
like it, but the instant they start screwing me around, you can bet I'll drop
Red Hat like a hot potato (indeed, I could drop them *for* a potato -- a
Debian potato! ;).
If you do not like the thought of being tied to a specific distribution by
your commercial vendor, then don't use the commercial software! The lock-in
is not by the distro vendor, but by your commercial software vendor. You made
your bed, now sleep in it.
Now, I am not against projects like the Linux Standards Base. I think they
are a good thing. Standards are a good thing. However, the LSB is just a
document, not a distribution. The LSB will never be complete enough to
specify every part of a distribution (if it did go that far, then it would
simply become a distribution you have to assemble yourself). There will
always be differences between distributions, and between releases of those
distributions.
The end result is that commercial software companies and the like will
partner with commercial Linux support companies (like Red Hat), and sooner or
later some sort of agreement will be reached as to who makes what decisions in
that world. Independent organizations and people who desire a standard will
choose what works for them. People who do not care will continue to not care,
and happily recompile from source.
The only standard Linux must follow is freedom.
</SOAPBOX>
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in this message are strictly those of |
| the author, and do not necessarily represent the views or policy of any |
| other person, entity or organization. |
**********************************************************
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
**********************************************************
