Binary incompatibility of Linux distributions

[Verde Denim]

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Odd <iodine at runbox.no> wrote:

> Steven Susbauer wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 May 2009 10:33:43 -0500, Odd <iodine at runbox.no> wrote:
> >
> >> Amedee Van Gasse (Ubuntu) wrote:
> >>> Read Mark's arguments on
> >>>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MarkShuttleworth#What%20about%20binary%20compatibility%20between%20distributions
> ?
> >>>
> >>> At the bottom we read what Linus thinks:
> >>>
> >>> It is worth noting that the Linux kernel itself takes the same
> approach,
> >>> shunning "binary compatibility" in favour of a "custom monolithic
> >>> kernel".
> >>> Each release of the kernel requires that it be compiled separately from
> >>> previous releases. Modules (drivers) need to be recompiled with the new
> >>> release, they cannot just be used in their binary form. Linus has
> >>> specifically stated that the monolithic kernel - based on source code,
> >>> not
> >>> trying to maintain a binary interface for drivers across releases - is
> >>> better for the kernel. We believe the same is true for the
> distribution.
> >> I do see their point, but from an end-user's POV, it's a hassle.
> >
> > Not a large one, and many binaries are perfectly compatible. Recompiling
> > software is not really that hard, and a good way to avoid
>
> End-users mostly aren't capable of that, and they shouldnt
> need to be. If you want Linux to become more than a geek-only
> OS, you need to realize this. Installing apps should be as easy,
> or easier, than on Windows.
>
> > incompatibilities between distros is to only share the source code (if
> > sharing software), or use one distro and stop jumping around (unless
> > willing to deal with minor differences ;) )
>
> This too is over the head of most end-users. The sooner we take
> that into account, the better it will be for Linux adoption.


The unfortunate truth is that most folk in userland have been indoctrinated
into the 'church of the windows lemming'... so they simply recite the mantra
"click and go..." and expect that their laptop/desktop will now make toast
just like the picture on the button/dialog. It may be possible (and indeed
has, in many instances) to make the compilation of needed modules for a
kernel update to be transparent to the user, but remember that when a new
"kernel upgrade" is out for windows, it's a new version, with a new price
tag. The *NIX philosophy is more along the lines of "here's something that
we did to improve/secure the system a bit better - if you'd like the update,
get it here, but know that some of your customized parts may need a tweak or
two (and oh, by the way, you can get the instructions on those tweaks
[here])...

I personally haven't minded participating in the open source community for
so long simply because it's a never-ending classroom which allows me to
learn something new nearly every day. Whenever I have to work on a site
which only allows/uses M$ software, I feel a bit rusty getting back into my
personal comfort zone, which for the last few years has been divided between
Ubuntu and Gentoo.

Just my $.02

Jack

>
>
> --
> Odd
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20090513/9f0289d1/attachment.html>