71–80 of 348 posts
Sorry, penguin lovers — if you thought that 2015, in the heinous wake of Windows 8, would finally be the year of desktop Linux, you were sadly mistaken. If you’ve ever ventured into the dark and mysterious land of Linutopia, where Ubutologists and Debianites reign, ... Wow what a snarky article! I guess Extremetech does not like Linux at all...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dependency management is more than 'defining and getting dependencies'. What if package X relies on version 1 of package A, and and package Y relies on version 2 of package A. Will they work together, each in an isolated sandbox, or will you have dependency conflicts? Package management is a really difficult problem to solve, which linux package managers have barely been able to solve. In addition to this, each progr…
Windows has had a solution for conflicting library dependencies since Windows 98: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side-by-side_assembly
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The release notes here ( https://github.com/OneGet/oneget/blob/master/release-notes.m... ) show a few mentions of defining and getting dependencies. I'm going to guess the answer is 'yes'.
Dependency management is more than 'defining and getting dependencies'. What if package X relies on version 1 of package A, and and package Y relies on version 2 of package A. Will they work together, each in an isolated sandbox, or will you have dependency conflicts? Package management is a really difficult problem to solve, which linux package managers have barely been able to solve. In addition to this, each progr…
Windows already has locally deployed assemblies and central side-by-side (SxS) assemblies that can accommodate multiple versions of the same assembly, complete with major/minor versioning, redirection etc. Windows Installer supports reference counting and automatic uninstalling for the centrally deployed assemblies.
This new OneGet package manager is for solving the availability and automatic updating of packages. But Windows is not going to need separate repositories for each incremental update of Windows and the ABI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The release notes here ( https://github.com/OneGet/oneget/blob/master/release-notes.m... ) show a few mentions of defining and getting dependencies. I'm going to guess the answer is 'yes'.
Dependency management is more than 'defining and getting dependencies'. What if package X relies on version 1 of package A, and and package Y relies on version 2 of package A. Will they work together, each in an isolated sandbox, or will you have dependency conflicts? Package management is a really difficult problem to solve, which linux package managers have barely been able to solve. In addition to this, each progr…
If there are two software packages which depend on different version of a third party package, then the usual practice is that either the third party DLLs are included in the package or both the versions are specifically installed.
I think this is the way that OSX works as well - it is only Linux that works with centralized dependencies, which is what needs a very sophisticated dependency management solution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
install-package java --defaults > Installing: > Java > Ask.com toolbar > Ask.com rootkit
More like C: \> instpkg32.exe /DefaultSettings:ALL_DEFAULTS C: \> Cryptically named command with verbose arguments, that then goes on to fire a GUI window that requires manual intervention: that's the Microsoft way.
As simple as it seems, this single failing has been my primary reason for outright dismissing Windows as a reasonable contender for server usage, no matter what else Microsoft might do to make it attractive for a variety of server tasks. A system that cannot be updated easily without human intervention is not a system that deserves a place in any data center.
Very expensive though and not good usability - but is far more sophisticated (with P2P downloading, tree structure repositories, etc.)
Sorry, penguin lovers — if you thought that 2015, in the heinous wake of Windows 8, would finally be the year of desktop Linux, you were sadly mistaken. If you’ve ever ventured into the dark and mysterious land of Linutopia, where Ubutologists and Debianites reign, ... Wow what a snarky article! I guess Extremetech does not like Linux at all...
I love Linux - been using it for several years and wouldn't trade it for anything (be it OS X or Win with package manager).
Package manager is certainly an awesome thing, but not something that would make me (and probably anyone else using Linux) to switch over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being built on Linux as GP suggested doesn't mean its just Linux -- presumably you'd implementing Windows APIs on top of Linux. Think WINE, but without the disadvantage of having to be done by third parties. Though a more likely way, were Microsoft to want to bridge that gap, would be to have a solid first-party POSIX environment on top of Windows, rather than the other way around.
Why? What's the point? NT isn't bad at all, it's just different from POSIX (hell, I can't believe the irony of this statement, but I'm glad that Microsoft is still around to resist the POSIX monoculture ). Neither Microsoft nor the Free Software™ world would gain much from killing the NT kernel, but the latter camp would gain so much more from learning the lessons that made Windows so successful 20 goddamned years af…
The point is portability. People now write all of their server software for Linux. More people would bother porting it to Windows if doing so was easier.
Example: There is no Windows equivalent to epoll/kqueue. Neither of them is even POSIX. But if you bring this up to most Windows people they tell you to use IO completion ports, which are totally different and require the core of the program to be redesigned.