Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Linux Appears Fragmented:

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by prophet5 View Post
    Svartalf, At risk of going off topic a bit, I'd like to ask you a question.
    Nary a problem.

    I've moved away from K/Ubuntu to Sabayon because I liked the rolling release nature of a Gentoo based distro and hated the "Forced Upgrade" nature of Ubuntu (ie. once the repos for your version are no longer supported, you have to upgrade the whole system, which may or may not work), but I'm not by any stretch of the imagination a linux wiz. I'm just an end user with enough know how to create a symlink, which I've had to do on occasion to statisfy versioning requirements of one or two programs
    You'll find that you're going to have that with any distribution. Even Sabayon will eventually have that "forced upgrade" thing as you get nifty new functionality. Happens with Windows. Happens with MacOS as well. Now, perhaps the rate at which it happens might be slower with Sabayon- but it will STILL happen.

    My question is, why bother using versioning? I mean yes update lib's and such, and by all means refer to the version number in tarballs and package managers, but why not use the same name once installed eg 'libxyz1.2' -> 'libxyz1.3' when installed would just be 'libxyz'. Would this not solve the compatability issue when a program is asking for a particular lib but can only find the updated version? This would also mean that all updates would need to be backward compatible with its older versions.
    1) Versioning avoids DLL HELL. There is no versioning whatsoever with DLLs.

    2) How do you know which is which when there happens to be improvements in the API as well as extra edges added in without versioning? A change from 1.0 to 2.0 may well radically change things. A change from 1.2 to 1.4 may add an extra function or change how a current function goes about doing things. Just using the same name on the library isn't a good idea- if you presume a 1.4 edge and 1.2 had slightly differing rules for usage, you can end up with a crashing app- and no idea as to WHY.

    In the end, your idea, while it seems "obvious", isn't such a hot idea after all.

    Comment


    • #47
      You'll find that you're going to have that with any distribution. Even Sabayon will eventually have that "forced upgrade" thing as you get nifty new functionality. Happens with Windows. Happens with MacOS as well. Now, perhaps the rate at which it happens might be slower with Sabayon- but it will STILL happen.
      Too true, but at least the upgrade is only if I want the nifty new functionality ie if my system at that time supports it. My experience with K/Ubuntu was not so kind where the repo for the version I was running at the time came to an end therefore needed a distro upgrade (which didn't work and ended in a new download of an iso) to a system that my hardware at the time could not handle with any real performance. With Sabayon, even though it uses entropy as a package manager, I don't have to upgrade when it switches branches. I can still use portage for any apps I may want to install and complile against the kernel and drivers that work for my hardware.

      In the end, your idea, while it seems "obvious", isn't such a hot idea after all.
      Well...at least there's a reason

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by prophet5
        This would also mean that all updates would need to be backward compatible with its older versions.
        There, you've answered your own question

        Comment

        Working...
        X