On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Aaron J. Grier <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 10:21:50AM -0800, Scott Francis wrote:
>> sure, you _could_ do the OS as a collection of packages ... given that
>> no other UNIX-like OS historically has done that, you could also
>> adhere to the principle of least surprise and keep a clear segregation
>> between core OS (kernel, base tools) and aftermarket packages.
>
> any examples of linux distributions in which segregation between "core
> OS" and "aftermarket packages" is not an ephemeral illusion?
>
> I count 29 distinct RPM packages on my fedora machine for the contents
> of /bin.
>
> $ rpm -q -l basesystem
> (contains no files)
slackware, maybe; I haven't used it in a while, but it _is_ the most
BSD-like of the Linuxes. Pretty much all RH and Debian derivatives use
packages to manage the base OS (which is not without its benefits, but
tossing non-core apps in with e.g. /usr/lib and /sbin is a little more
chaos than I'm prepared to appreciate).
--
Scott Francis | darkuncle(at)darkuncle(dot)net | 0x5537F527
Less and less is done
until non-action is achieved
when nothing is done, nothing is left undone.
-- the Tao of Sysadmin
