Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EdgeBSD Born Out Of NetBSD Operating System

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by beetreetime View Post
    Wrong, KDE is dead. Gnome killed it. Gnome's decision to concentrate on Linux only has allowed it to produce better desktop enviroments.
    Wrong, gnome is nearly dead and most people are using its derivatives like Cinnamon and Unity. Furthermore, KDE has larger market share according to polls. Even if Gnome concentrated only on Linux it still terribly sucks. For example gnome shell is slow, unstable mess and gnome applications are featureless.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by brad0 View Post
      Neither of them are dead. Keep smoking on the crack pipe.

      As if the situation with Operating Systems based on the Linux kernel are any better. There are hundreds of Operating Systems based on the Linux kernel and that's not fragmentation? Are you kidding me? distro is a term created by the communities around these Operating Systems and all it does is confuse people. What they really mean is Operating System as that is what they are. There are more than enough Linux based Operating Systems that are literally run by one or two users and that's it.
      Well not really. Distributions are not really distinct operating systems, there's too much shared code to call them that. It's rather like taxonomy and evolution - there's no distinct line drawn when a species becomes another species, it's more a continuous, fluid transformation where genetic material changes in small increments... the same way Linux distros evolve and change and breed other Linux distributions and branch out and some of the branches flourish while others wither and die. It's not called a "software ecosystem" just for shits and giggles...

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by beetreetime View Post
        Wrong, KDE is dead. Gnome killed it.
        Honton/funkStar, is that you?

        there's no distinct line drawn when a species becomes another species
        Indeed there is, you have a new species when the individuals of the new branch can not interbreed anymore with the old branch. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by beetreetime View Post
          Wrong, KDE is dead. Gnome killed it. Gnome's decision to concentrate on Linux only has allowed it to produce better desktop enviroments.

          EdgeBSD: BSD is getting more and more fragmentated. More versions appearing that are incompatible with each other. Unlike Linux in which all distros are binary compatitble. The number of BSD versions and BSD fragments are converging. Soon there be an average of one user per BSD version and then the number of BSD versions will decrease to zero and the world would be a better place.
          This is either some of the best trolling I've seen in a while, or ...nevermind

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
            Indeed there is, you have a new species when the individuals of the new branch can not interbreed anymore with the old branch. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation
            That only applies to parallel diverging branches, it does not apply to linear evolution from parent species to child species, and even then it isn't an absolute or consistent rule, as related species can sometimes interbreed even when they're clearly considered different species (horse/donkey/zebra, lion/tiger, dog/wolf...)

            I see your wikipedia link and raise by another: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_problem

            Comment


            • #21
              Let's see how the libc versions affect binary compatability...
              glibc (libc6): 2.x is likely to not run stuff compiled with 2.x+1; 2.x+1 can run stuff compiled with 2.x.
              eglibc: same, except you can turn off support for features. If you turn off a feature, anything that uses it won't work.
              Compatible with glibc.
              (the above two are fairly widely used, but there are several versions in use. LSB ABI is a subset of glibc.)
              musl: compatible with a subset of glibc ABI. Usually backwards and forwards compatible.
              uclibc: No compatability with anything, including stuff compiled with older or newer versions.
              (Both used in a few distros, with occasional use in parallel with the main libc.)
              dietlibc: "Unofficially" compatible with older and newer versions; not ABI compatible with any other library
              klibc: not compatible with anything else; no documentation I could find on backwards/forwards compatability.
              (Both almost always used in parallel with glibc, to create static binaries)
              bionic: Incompatible ABI, based on a mix of BSD libcs. Also full of stubs. (Android.)
              olibc: bionic ABI, but with the stubs filled out. Aimed at embedded systems, AFAICT.
              newlib: incompatible ABI; embedded or parallel.
              And then there are at least three other ANSI libcs (ccaprice, pdlibc, PDClib) that aim at static linking, so the binaries might be portable. ISTR some also support shared binaries...

              Long story short:
              If you build it on an old glibc-based distro, it will run on most Linux distros.
              If you build it static, it will run on all Linux distros that have a properly configured kernel and filesystem.
              If you use uclibc shared, it's for one distro release.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by beetreetime View Post
                EdgeBSD: BSD is getting more and more fragmentated. More versions appearing that are incompatible with each other. Unlike Linux in which all distros are binary compatitble. The number of BSD versions and BSD fragments are converging. Soon there be an average of one user per BSD version and then the number of BSD versions will decrease to zero and the world would be a better place.
                I have ignored the first statement as it is entirely subjective (and laughable in the extreme). Following is a sentence-by-sentence refutation of your claims.

                EdgeBSD is essentially functioning as a NetBSD 'unstable branch', a grounds for exciting new additions to be pushed upstream to NetBSD.

                Linux and binary compatibility in the same sentence is dubious.

                Do you know what converging means? You would be sort-of right with 'diverging', but not including variants and extremely fringe projects, there are only 4 BSDs (and all 4 have a measure of binary compatibility - with each other! and their prior releases, as well! and even with other OSes (including Linux)!)

                And no.

                Comment

                Working...
                X