gentoo - wow!! - progress

[Collins]

[ severely snipped ]

On Sun, 30 Jun 2002 14:35:34 -0400 dep <dep at linuxandmain.com> wrote:
> begin  Collins's  quote:
> 
> | What, exactly, are the benefits to be gained from enforcing the
> | fhs?
> 
> consistency, so that there is a meaning to the word "linux" beyond
> the kernel.
> 

> 
> | You keep metioning "screw around with the system."  The beauty of
> | the current gentoo structure is the structure.
> 
> in which case it is devoid of beauty, because it has taken a flyer
> off in some weird and utterly unnecessary direction. 
> 

> 
> | With gentoo, I don't need to subscribe to red
> | carpet or anthing else to maintain my system.  The tools are built
> | in, and my hard drive isn't a battle ground.
> 
> no. but it's not the residence of a linux system, either -- it's the
>  residence of a gentoo system that employs linux software.
> 
> | Linux is fragmented in ways that even the new religion of fhs
> can't| fix.  
> 
> the fhs has been around linux, i daresay, longer than you have.
> 
> | You need only think about the competing desktops and the
> | scads of products that are bound to specific levels of library
> | support.  I submit that if you could wave your magic wand, convert
> | all distros to the same fhs file structure, etc., the
> fragmentation| would not disappear.
> 
> your submission, duly noted, is wrong.
> 
> | Linux is and always will be about choices,
> | and I doubt that linux will ever become the M$ monolith.
> 
> it certainly won't. it will, at the current rate, be fragmented away
> > into oblivion, because people pay no attention to even a minimal
> > set of standards and even argue that there shouldn't be any. which
> > opens
> up room for standards to be dictated. which will be done by the big 
> dog.  ...

>. linux offers choices in a number of categories. but
> without a minimal set of standards linux is about nothing except the
> disappearance of all but red hat linux, as well as a couple of
> novelty distributions, such as gentoo.
> 
> | So, my hard drive will melt into the ground and I won't be able to
> | install one of the new blessed-by-you fhs distributions if I
> | choose? <grin>  I don't think so.
> 
> i do not know what will happen to your hard drive, but you won't be 
> able to install a linux distribution other than red hat if there 
> aren't any out there. which is a very distinct possibility. well, 
> there will always be debian, i suppose.
> -- 

OK, here's where we differ:

1) You have a fanatic allegiance to a set of standards that no one
anywhere has completely implemented and seem to have a (from my
standpoint) somewhat naive belief that implementation of the fhs is
some sort of magic bullet that will guarantee world dominance for
linux.

2) The words "even a minimal set of standards" keep cropping up. 
There are quite a few minimal standards, and most of them seem to be
coalescing around the spirit of the fhs if not the letter. 
Unfortunately, you seem to be enraged by the fact that a distro that
does not dot every i and ross every t in exactly the same fashion can
be moderately successful.

3) I sincerely doubt that anything (be it fhs or whatever) will slow
the onslaught of RedHat.  They have always had the M$ bent of
dominion.  All I can say here is that better RedHat linux than no
linux.  The fhs filesystem and maintenance structure basically
incorporates the RedHat way of doing things, so I fail to see why you
believe this is a bad thing.

4) You are very right.  I haven't been in the linux game longer than a
few years.  In that span of time I haven't reached that enlightened
state of bliss where I believe that I know the right (and the only
permitted) approach for everyone else, and I hope I never reach that
state.

5) In spite of your diatribes against some aspect of almost every
distro, I have yet to hear any concrete examples of things that cannot
be done that you (or anyone else) needs to do.  What packages are you
unable to install because one distro uses the /usr hierarchy and
another distro uses the /opt hierarchy?  What difference does it make
if one distro uses BSD based boot scripts, another System V, and
another dependancy based boot scripts?  For, example, adherance to the
fhs is not going to cure the rampant dependancies on specific levels
of library support that make many products so difficult to install. 
It's not going to change the fact that averytime glibc changes, we're
all screwed.

6) Put your money where your mouth is.  If Slackware or gentoo (or
pick any non-commercial distro) has flaws that you would like to see
corrected, come down out of your ivory tower, put up the distro, work
with it, learn its pluses and minuses, join the developer mailing
list, discuss the supposed flaws with the developers, and be a
creative part of producing something better.  Sitting on the sidelines
and carping doesn't cut it, IMO.  When you've put your blood, sweat,
and tears into the fight and you have an fhs-pure distro, let us know.

7) When I first encountered the gentoo distro, the slogan "novelty
distribution" (as you sescribed it) was definitely appropriate.  Since
that time I've watched the product develop into a very useful
offering.  The world wide team of developers that are now producing
gentoo have no time for finding fault with other distros - they're too
busy making their product the best that it can be.  If that best is a
"gentoo system that employs linux software," (as you described it),
then so be it.  The gentoo motto could be that of the little train
that said: "I knew I could ..." over and over as it climbed the hill. 
You seem to be stuck at "Whatever it is, I'm against it."

Thanks,
-- 
Collins Richey - Denver Area - WWTLRD?
gentoo(since 01/01/01) 2.4.18+(ext3) xfce-sylpheed-mozilla