61–70 of 113 posts
Debian's dpkg and apt are both GPL2+. What's the reason they are reinventing the wheel here? Is there some kind of licence incompatibility that the GNU project cares about? Is there some kind of major architectural difference? Why is it important enough to fragment Free Software developers over? I feel that this should be answered in an FAQ, but I can't find the answer anywhere.
Debian's dpkg and apt are both GPL2+. What's the reason they are reinventing the wheel here? Is there some kind of licence incompatibility that the GNU project cares about? Is there some kind of major architectural difference? Why is it important enough to fragment Free Software developers over? I feel that this should be answered in an FAQ, but I can't find the answer anywhere.
Maybe they'd eventually like to stop having to say Gnu/Linux.
It seems everyone reinvents package management poorly again and again. Some things that obviously stand out to me: * Why utilize scheme? It's declaritive utilize a markup like yaml, don't go off the deep end because you can. * Utilize OS specific features such as jails, bind mounts, namespaces, you can have the same NIX style separation without destroying FHS. * Parse the config files for options, it's easy cmake, au…
Please, utilise the word "use".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Might as well use python because of greater?? adoption and ease of use?
I suspect the fact there's GNU Guile, an entirely in-house Scheme ecosystem, has a lot to do with it. Use Python and be beholden to the Python community (outsiders!) Use JSON (as someone else suggested) and be beholden to the Javascript/JSON community (outsiders! oh and that awful JSON license!) etc.
The Linux community needed this around 15 years ago when Windows 98 came out. Now we've got .deb and .rpm which do the job perfectly well. It's even better nowadays, as well, since their existence is effectively hidden from the user thanks to package managers. Too little, way too late.
There are many approaches that one would mistake as being "reinventing the wheel":
1. FreeBSD ports system is barebones, but incredibly simple and transparent.
2. Arch Linux's PKGBUILD recipes are also simple and, at times, a much better alternative to binary packages.
3. Gobo Linux (http://www.gobolinux.org) solved binary packaging the right way by having each package in it's own tree. It's approach is similar to OS X, which also gets this right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Might as well use python because of greater?? adoption and ease of use?
I suspect the fact there's GNU Guile, an entirely in-house Scheme ecosystem, has a lot to do with it. Use Python and be beholden to the Python community (outsiders!) Use JSON (as someone else suggested) and be beholden to the Javascript/JSON community (outsiders! oh and that awful JSON license!) etc.
JSON is just a file format. A simple one too. There are plenty of parsers available, with various licenses.
Debian's dpkg and apt are both GPL2+. What's the reason they are reinventing the wheel here? Is there some kind of licence incompatibility that the GNU project cares about? Is there some kind of major architectural difference? Why is it important enough to fragment Free Software developers over? I feel that this should be answered in an FAQ, but I can't find the answer anywhere.
Usually when there is no clear answer to this in a FOSS project, I think it's safe to assume the answer is ego.
I support what they are doing. Wheels sometimes get better when they are reinvented.
Debian's dpkg and apt are both GPL2+. What's the reason they are reinventing the wheel here? Is there some kind of licence incompatibility that the GNU project cares about? Is there some kind of major architectural difference? Why is it important enough to fragment Free Software developers over? I feel that this should be answered in an FAQ, but I can't find the answer anywhere.
Those things are never going to be adopted by Fedora, Arch, Gentoo, or any other non-Debian based distro. That is reason enough not to use it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That particular Xkcd comic has been posted 79 times in the past year or so† and has quickly become a cliché. The authors' stated goals are to make a "purely functional" and "practical 100% free" package manager.†† They don't mention competition, proliferation, or winning market share. A vague hope of consistency and cohesion accompanying the announcement of a program "approaching its first alpha release" isn't a rall…
Hah. Your post made me curious which xkcds are the most popular on HN. This is the top10 (caveat below): 48 http://xkcd.com/927/ 48 http://xkcd.com/386/ 33 http://xkcd.com/538/ 28 http://xkcd.com/378/ 24 http://xkcd.com/810/ 23 http://xkcd.com/327/ 22 http://xkcd.com/323/ 21 http://xkcd.com/605/ 19 http://xkcd.com/936/ 17 http://xkcd.com/552/ You can easily reproduce the results by using the hnsearch API via curl "ht…
Relevant xkcd: http://xkcd.com/688/
(Sorry, couldn't resist)