"goarilla <"kevin<punt>paulus|"@|skynet" <"punt> wrote in message
news:48496d7f$0$2846$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
> jim wrote:
>> "goarilla <"kevin<punt>paulus|"@|skynet" <"punt> wrote in message
>> news:48481030$0$2800$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
>>> jim wrote:
>>>> "Steve Ackman" <steve@SNIP-THIS.twoloonscoffee.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:slrng4b5og.l21.steve@sorceror.wizard.dyndns.o rg...
>>>>> In <yze1k.3525$tT4.3213@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, on Tue, 3 Jun 2008
>>>>> 12:47:03 -0400, jim, jim@home.net wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Although it kinda worries me that Linux distros are so different that
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> may not all be able to run the same software.
>>>>> IME, they can all run the same software... just that
>>>>> some may have your software of interest packaged up all
>>>>> pretty, so you just have to issue something simple like
>>>>> 'apt-get install pkgname' while with others you may
>>>>> have to go find a source tarball and do something more
>>>>> along the lines of
>>>>> 'tar -xzvf pkgname; cd pkgdir'
>>>>> 'configure; make; make install'
>>>>>
>>>>> (or use a pointy-clicky that does either of those for
>>>>> you)
>>>> OK. Maybe I misunderstood No_One's comment when he responded to me....
>>>>
>>>> -- BEGIN No_One's reply to me.......
>>>>>>> I was also thinking that a central package repository supported
>>>>>>> (financially
>>>>>>> and otherwise) by a consortium of Linux-base companies like Novell,
>>>>>>> Ubuntu,
>>>>>>> RedHat, Linspire, etc. could have a simple interface like the one in
>>>>>>> Linspire's Click-N-Run application, would be able to support all of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> participating distros and could have awesome bandwidth to allow for
>>>>>>> faster
>>>>>>> downloads by all distros.
>>>>>> The above paragraph displays a lack of basic understanding about
>>>>>> Linux and
>>>>>> the differences within each distro.
>>>> -- END No_One's reply to me.......
>>>>
>>>> If they all run the same core, why can't they all have a simple
>>>> Click-N-Run installer that is centrally administered for the good of
>>>> the Linux community?
>>>>
>>>>>> What if your distro ceases to
>>>>>> exist (as happens in the Linux community)? Are you stuck updating
>>>>>> the OS
>>>>>> yourself?
>>>>> What do you do when Windows 95 ceases to exist (as
>>>>> happens in the closed source community)? Are you stuck
>>>>> updating the OS yourself?
>>>>> At least with Linux, you CAN keep your system up to
>>>>> date long after support from the distributor vanishes.
>>>> True enough.
>>>>
>>>>>> (I don't know many end users that really want the responsibility
>>>>>> of coding their entire OS and the related software packages.)
>>>>> I can't even parse that. What the hell does that
>>>>> even mean?
>>>> * With my misunderstanding No_One's comment (I thought that he meant
>>>> that the Linux distros were all so different that you can't run
>>>> software from one distro on another.) I assummed that the demis eof a
>>>> distro meant that the user would have to jump in and take over the
>>>> coding of the OS and the apps.
>>>>
>>>>>> Do you have to change distros to stay safe?
>>>> (see *)
>>>>
>>>>>> What if the new distro doesn't support the packages that you used on
>>>>>> your
>>>>>> old distro?
>>>> (see *)
>>>>
>>>>>> Can your data be transferred to new packages?
>>>> (see *)
>>>>
>>>>>> It would seem that all a Linux distro should be is a different set of
>>>>>> applications built on the same core Linux system.
>>>>> That's exactly what it is. Linux = kernel.
>>>>> Usually people also mentally include all the GNU
>>>>> utilities that come with it to make a functioning
>>>>> system. (Practically speaking, there's not much you
>>>>> can do with just the kernel)
>>>> I get that now. Thanks for explaining it to me.
>>>>
>>>>>> It would seem that having
>>>>>> all Linux distros settle on a single core (perhaps Ubuntu)
>>>>> But Ubuntu isn't a "core" distribution, but a
>>>>> spin-off of Debian.
>>>> Whatever the "core" - I meant that a single core would seem to make it
>>>> easy to move apps and data from one distro to another.
>>>>
>>>>>> would only server to strengthen Linux.
>>>>> All Linux distributions use the Linux kernel. That
>>>>> is the single core. Further, they pretty much all use
>>>>> a common set of GNU tools. That's what makes one Linux
>>>>> distro pretty much like any other.
>>>> (see *)
>>>>
>>>>>> Could you enlighten me as to why this may not be desirable?
>>>>> It *is* desirable that all Linux distros use Linux.
>>>>> So they do. If you think about for half a second, a
>>>>> Linux distribution would have to use a Linux kernel,
>>>>> otherwise it would be a Hurd/GNU/Unix distribution.
>>>>>
>>>>> Really the only "major" differences between
>>>>> distributions are init sequences and package managers.
>>>>> Then the minor differences are which packages are
>>>>> included on the DVD/CDs/available in repositories, and
>>>>> what kind of default configs are included.
>>>> OK. Now that I understand Linux cores VS distros better, ny question
>>>> remains the same...why not have a central Click-N-Run repository,
>>>> maintained by the big Linux backers that keeps updating and adding
>>>> programs as simple as possible?
>>>>
>>>> jim
>>> security, why would we want one point of failure ?
>>
>> You mean....like the kernel?
>>
>> jim
> well played :)

Just kidding of course..... ;)

jim