LXQt 0.9 Released, Now Requires Qt5 & KDE Frameworks 5

[dungeon]

There is no standardization, when one wants gcc other wants llvm, one wants X other wants Wayland, one wants Firefox other wants Chrome, one wants OpenGL other wants Direct3D, one wants Gnome other wants KDE, one wants traditional CPU software other wants HSA, etc...

Linux will be boring if there is only one distro, only what is standardized are forks Don't like it - fork it

It is not only about Linux, look at Window Managers Bloodlines

[bitman]

There is no standardization, when one wants gcc other wants llvm, one wants X other wants Wayland, one wants Firefox other wants Chrome, one wants OpenGL other wants Direct3D, one wants Gnome other wants KDE, one wants traditional CPU software other wants HSA, etc...

Linux will be boring if there is only one distro, only what is standardized are forks Don't like it - fork it

It is not only about Linux, look at Window Managers Bloodlines

This is exactly why linux is failing on desktop. If you find tinkering all day in config files fun then good for you *thumbs-up*. Bigger part of remaining world actually wants to just get on with their stuff. You know do their thing and be productive in it. And be able to run software without a hassle. So please dont present lack of standartisation as something good because its not.

[pininety]

People complain that linux lacks standardization but I love the freedom of choice.

Sorry but this statement is pretty much useless as it does not define what you mean by standardization or which freedom of choice you are speaking of.

Lets have an little example.

Lets have Interfaces I and Software S using these Interfaces. Lets assume you have a limited amount of time to write software.
Now, the more freedom of choice you have in interfaces, the less choice you have in software because writing software which supports 20 Interfaces all doing nearly the same takes more time then writing software which just supports one interface.
It also goes the other way around.

So if you really want to have a lot of software to choose from, you really are for interface standardization. Why have 20 ways to mount removable media? Have on interface and then you can have it work in any of your 20 filemanagers. But if you have 20 different ways a removable media can be mounted, even one file manager will most likely not implement them all.

[dungeon]

Bigger part of remaining world actually wants to just get on with their stuff.

Bigger part of the world does not know what they want, they might *want* so requiest that something which is *support* they need *right now* but they does not know anything about future... what happens usually is that some big company being ready just in time to drop devices on masses and masses does not know what other to do then to use it .

That was the case with Microsoft's Windows and Google's Android... and Linux is nothing a like - it is just a kernel, you can name only distribution you like to use

[bitman]

Bigger part of the world does not know what they want, they might *want* so requiest that something which is *support* they need *right now* but they does not know anything about future... what happens usually is that some big company being ready just in time to drop devices on masses and masses does not know what other to do then to use it .

That was the case with Microsoft's Windows and Google's Android... and Linux is nothing a like - it is just a kernel, you can name only distribution you like to use

<rant>
People do not know what they want? Ofc they do! They want their apps XYZ to work so they can do their thing. Also they want same software run next time they upgrade system. Without having them to redownload/reinstall/recompile stuff. Developer part of the world want to easily target platform with reasonable backwards compatibility. Meaning build software once and have it run on all reasonably new distros in case of linux. Say distros released within last 5 years.

Can we do that? Well users have this problem hidden away behind package manager. Its wrong approach but it somewhat works. Developers should package software. Distro maintainers should provide only core system and most essential software via package manager. Developers have it way harder. Try building complex (lots of dependencies) software on latest distro and get it to run on old distro. Good luck. (building on old distro is not a solution. besides it brings its own pains. building in chroot is not a solution either because same pains apply and besides its a hack-solution to the problem that should not exist).

All in all indeed linux needs standards. Distros should provide core stable abi. And there should be way to target older abi without resolving to horrible hacks. LSB is good, just have to make distro makers make their stuff LSB compliant.
</rant>

[dungeon]

Developers should package software.

For which distribution?

LSB is good, just have to make distro makers make their stuff LSB compliant.

Again that only might work for proprietary software... if you have 300 distributions that does not gona fly. And if you have only one, it will be the same shit as Windows or Android

And if you don't think Windows or Android are shits, you should use them many people do

[dungeon]

And if you don't think Windows or Android are shits, you should use them many people do

And why those are "easy" to use? BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE USE THEM

[bitman]

For which distribution?

See need for asking this question illustrates problem at hand. Kernel is the same. Filesystem layout os mostly the same. We have XDG and LSB. There should be a way to package software once for it to run on most of recent distros.

Again that only might work for proprietary software... if you have 300 distributions that does not gona fly. And if you have only one, it will be the same shit as Windows or Android

And if you don't think Windows or Android are shits, you should use them many people do

Alienating proprietary software like that does little good. I do use both windows and android. Windows because well.. It needs to be supported by software i contrbute to. Android because hell it works. IMO linux distros should follow model of android. Stable API/ABI, toolset allowing to target w/e version one wishes and then it all being open to build on top of. But most people love to brush this problem under a rug claiming its not problem at all. And thats why linux on desktop is dead. And it is a shame.

[dungeon]

Alienating proprietary software like that does little good.

Big old community distros projects like Fedora and Debian does that, now what?

I do use both windows and android. Windows because well.. It needs to be supported by software i contrbute to. Android because hell it works.

So you like some distribution to be just like some baked by big enormous companies, isn't it? While those can be fine wishes, that does not mean distributions as a whole does something improper.

And thats why linux on desktop is dead. And it is a shame.

Killed by systemd. Half people goes here, half people goes there - some people leaving, thing get forked again and we have less people and more distros

[dungeon]

Big old community distros projects like Fedora and Debian does that, now what?

Turn off those two from Linux scene because both alienating proprietary software... what else you have