Good idea!hudson wrote:I was just suggesting that a little more finger pointing and throwing its weight around would be a good thing. That could go right alongside triming down the number of packages from 40,000 to maybe 25,000 really good ones
Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
Idea: Linux based OS should be made (slightly?) differently
Re: Idea: Linux based OS should be made (slightly?) differen
Debian == { > 30, 000 packages }; Debian != systemd
The worst infection of all, is a false sense of security!
It is hard to get away from CLI tools.
The worst infection of all, is a false sense of security!
It is hard to get away from CLI tools.
Re: Idea: Linux based OS should be made (slightly?) differen
+1 Spot onRandicus wrote:In other words; every distribution uses the same operating system, with the only differences being the number of packages available. What would be the purpose of having more than one distribution? The end result of your model would be one Linux OS. Then you would complain about the lack of choice.
spacex(ew)
http://tweaklinux.org
http://tweaklinux.org
Re: Idea: Linux based OS should be made (slightly?) differen
When win 10 was released the number of their knowledge base number crossed 30 000 ... not everyone of this numbers are bugs, but most of them are...
so which is better have all software with 80 000, or have only base system with 20 000 bugs?
not everyone of this numbers are bugs, but most of them are...so which is better have all software with 80 000, or have only base system with 20 000 bugs?
Re: Idea: Linux based OS should be made BSD compat
gnu-libc (and mozilla) are becoming microsoft and google hacked, and both these parties have vested interests toward shaming linux
Apple (iphone) has befriended FreeBSD, X11 (and X.org) but not linux.
Linux + libc should optionally include MORE kernel and libc sameness wherever possibly.
Example:
glibc bcopy.c ? already done
glibc strnstr.c ? MISSING, but all too simple to have/use
some features of BSD would be more challenging, esp the networking or security hack portion of bsd kernel, or module support even
----------------------------------------------
really linux is a "free kernel" that got made because (unisys, at&t, berkeley) kernels were non-free. it was meant to be posix compat, and there's nothign more posix compat than a standards based source base that's been used in MOST all consumer products sold in the world, whether posix agrees or not
(ie, iphone, ipad, etc)
Apple (iphone) has befriended FreeBSD, X11 (and X.org) but not linux.
Linux + libc should optionally include MORE kernel and libc sameness wherever possibly.
Example:
glibc bcopy.c ? already done
glibc strnstr.c ? MISSING, but all too simple to have/use
some features of BSD would be more challenging, esp the networking or security hack portion of bsd kernel, or module support even
----------------------------------------------
really linux is a "free kernel" that got made because (unisys, at&t, berkeley) kernels were non-free. it was meant to be posix compat, and there's nothign more posix compat than a standards based source base that's been used in MOST all consumer products sold in the world, whether posix agrees or not
(ie, iphone, ipad, etc)Re: Idea: Linux based OS should be made (slightly?) differen
where linux BSD compat would shine is: the linux build system would have the FREEDOM not to include modules the kernel maker does not wish to use, whereas in BSD once "the maintainers" decide to hack libc, it's all over, everyone must upgrade and use and all software is effected hosed quite often