[snip - a call for standardisation]
I completely agree, but I don't think Linux is going the wrong way (yet).Quote:> This is a call to the Linux Community of Developers to standardize AT
> LEAST these portions of Linux software.
As always, tarballs (./configure, make, su -c 'make install') stay (oh yesQuote:> 1. Installation of software
they will). Package-like installing (cfr deb, rpm, jbl, ...) goes the
right way: easy, user-friendly and without any hassle. I don't think it's
necessary to evolve to one package. Each type of packaging has it
advantages and disadvantages. It's a choice, a mindgame if you will. Some
people like the deb-packages since they are extremely easy to install.
Some others want rpm, since the availability of those files is enormous.
Some people stay with the tarballs.
I don't think Linux is going the wrong way.
With packages without any hassle. With tarballs you should look at theQuote:> 2. Removal of software
Makefile before 'make install'-ing and search for 'make uninstall'. If
that's available (and correctly programmed), there isn't any other hassle.
This could be one point of discussion (tarballs - uninstalling software),
but I don't know enough about tarballs (I only use them if I can't find
any rpm-files for it) so I'd better shut up :-/
Again, with packages no troubles. Tarballs are also without any hassle,Quote:> 3. Upgrading of software
since upgrading is very simpel. Configuration-files stay (thus not the way
M$ handled things, i.e. registry), binaries get upgraded, libraries are
... how do they say it... renewed? I mean, a newer version of library
doesn't overwrite things (f.i. libsmpg-2.0-3.so.2), only has a greater
version-number (f.i. libsmpg-2.1-1.so.2). And ldconfig makes sure programs
use the right library...
/etc/*.conf, $HOME/.*rc, ... I think Linux (and most unix-like OS'ses) areQuote:> 4. Maintaining configuration files for installed software
doing a great job on that. They are easy to back-up, easy to modify
(manually AND with scripts/tools), ...