On 11/15/05, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Very good point and a right concern (to some degree) IMHO... > > As J.S. mentioned before, in the future we should expect at least 2 > > types of OpenSolaris-based distros: > > > > a) GNU-centric, those who trying to re-use GNU/Linux as much as possible > > > > b) Solaris-centric, those who trying to mimic Solaris as much as > > possible > > > > But I'm hoping that both (a) and (b) will be *much more* compatable than > > any two distros in GNU/Linux world. And the reason for my hope is that > > we are using the same "Least Common Denominator"(LCD) - OpenSolaris(tm) > > which is not just a kernel but userland too and developed under the > > single roof. In my sense, LCD will preserve inter-distro compatability. > > If you move all binaries from /usr/bin/ to /usr/sun/, like Nexenta is > doing, there is not much user space compatibility with Solaris left over.
I haven't used the pre-alpha, but I think this actually wouldn't be such a big deal. Assuming things are done intelligently, there is the 'alternatives' mechanism on Debian and by default you could have symlinks to make rather than gmake and tar rather than gtar, et al. by default. You could even create a package indicating Solaris compatability that requires all the basic stuff kind of like Linux standard base is done. Using absolute paths (like some Makefile's obnoxious tendency to assume /bin/bash does something, grrr!), is not something I would want to encourage. Of course, maybe there are a lot of applications for Solaris out there that make assumptions about paths, I don't know. Dave _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
