Linux fat/bloated

[Sy Ali]

On 4/5/06, Walter Dnes <waltdnes-SLHPyeZ9y/tg9hUCZPvPmw at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>   See article at http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9590-6057456.html where
> Nicholas Negroponte (a fan of linux, if there ever was one) admits the
> obvious; linux needs to be slimmed down.

I disagree.  Disk space is cheap and users don't care.

It's more important to have nice tools which fit the varying kinds of
developers so that better software can be created.  Dependancies
aren't a problem.. let the package manager handle it.  If things get
out of hand, it'll get fixed..

All a user cares about is *make it go*.  A serious distribution has
already balanced things quite nicely and a linux distro still won't
take an intimidating amount of drive space to run.

Low-end systems are a niche and not a large concern.  There are some
very good specialized-distributions for them anyways.

Servers are more of a concern for various reasons.  I still don't
worry too much though.

Desktop users don't care.. they just want to see their apps work and work well.


Dependancy hell is avoidable by breaking packages into smaller bits..
but at a very serious cost for maintainance.  So what if I need to
download less bloated dependancies to install my app.. when everything
is several steps behind the latest version because the packagers
haven't had the time to keep everything up to date.

Packaging tools do need improvement.  I actually sat down and
experimented with building RPMs.  Ugh.  That sucks.  Package
management is iffy.. heck, I just want proper descriptions for all the
software in my repository.  Hasn't anyone thought to have a
website-style package manager that acts as a gateway to screenshots,
explanations, documentation and the like?  It'd be nice to know what
an application is without having to google around for a better
description, or go to the thing's site (if I can find it) for info.


It is unfortunate that these new languages like Perl came out .. that
we can't all use one single good old language like Ruby.  But that'll
never happen.  All that choice nonsense people keep going on about. 
Everyone wants to do their own half-assed thing so the world is full
of 85% quality stuff.

If there were a real concern, then projects like heretix would take
off.  This project will be rewriting all the scripts, the package
management, making a custom software distribution application.. it
breaks away from insane legacy choices, etc etc.


But choice.. the developers want their choice.  So all those libraries
and dependancies (and their dependancies) exist.  I wouldn't force a
developer to use specific tools.. many would stop contributing to the
application pool.
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml