Re: Linux, X, ld, gcc, linking, shared libraries and stuff

På Sun, 03 Apr 2005 00:07:13 -0500, skrev NoDot <no_dot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:



On the subject of networking, is anyone else annoyed by the level of network transparency in Linux. I know it's derived from UNIX, which has to be network transparent, but I find it annoying for a simple desktop. Anyone else agree?

Yes. I dont know Linux, so I cant say much, but _if_ everything _has_ to be networked, seems anoying, and allmost certainly slow. But I assume you could be spesific and work around it if you dont need it ? I mean, beeing able to run your desktop on a remote computer, seem to me the least useful of all thinkable alternatives.

Well, the frown was because (if I even get it out, and that is a big if) DotOS v1.0 will look like DOS. It'll have infinite extensibility, perfectly able to accept a GUI shell, other FSs, more DDs, and other extensions (hopefully), but it'll be shipped with only a text-mode shell (no GUI) and a minimal system. The text-mode shell will always remain, though, even if a GUI is shipped with later versions (perhaps starting with v2; we'll see how things turn out). 

How far are you with this Dot-os. Where can we see it ?

Well, I think keeping the GUI out of the OS is a good idea (though the possibility of one should not be ignored). You could probably swap COMMAND.COM out for another shell and DOS wouldn't have known, correct? I like this way of doing things.

Je.... flexibility is great, it should be possible to replace much of everything, at some point. BUT, theres the issue of confusion. I dont know linux, but there seems to be several "window" managers available. How the hell to select one ? I want my linux apps, if I ever rewrite something in Linux, to run on Linux. Period. I dont want to educate the users to download and install this and that distro, and this and that shell (window) manager. That seems just a horrible situation.

Do Linux entusiast have a faintes clue at how fast even advanced users will bail out at even the smallest problem theese days ? I can guarantie you, that any application that isnt able to run and start and work, by 1 click, will never attract end users in the long run. Installing a seperate window manager just to try out an app is completly insane.


Beth :) 


--
http://TheWannabee.org
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why newbies dont RTFM...
    ... Even though I've used Linux before, I've never had to do any ... > BASH BUILTIN COMMANDS ... > last command exited within ... > unless the shell is not exeâ ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Why newbies dont RTFM...
    ... Even though I've used Linux before, I've never had to do any ... BASH BUILTIN COMMANDS ... last command exited within ... unless the shell is not exeâ ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: [opensuse] deleting
    ... during the installation of jre 1.5.0 (according to the install ... i'm learning and having fun with my new toy, the command line interface. ... understand and use linux more efficiently. ... /bin/sh is the Bourne Shell. ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: [opensuse] Future of SUSE (at home)
    ... BTW if you really want to make your windows stuff "just work" in linux, ... but you persist in saying "it can't be done". ... and you don't always need a shell. ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: Dude, wheres my network?
    ... > Mac does it too, of course, but most apps in Linux are amenable to the PNC ... SMIT also had an option to show you the low level commands it used so ... I opened a shell and typed man sys-unconfig and there it was. ... > window, ...
    (comp.unix.solaris)