Call For Action: Linux needs a Linux Standard Committee
Ming He
linux.
Like we have /bin, /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin.../sbin, /usr/sbin,
/usr/local/sbin..., we should have some guideline as which is going
where. For one, I don't like /lib and /lib/module sitting in /
partition.
We can have a committee setting standard for this. People don't have to
follow those standards, but we do have some guidelines.
Funding can come from industry, from linux vendors and hardware
vendors. It structure can be similar to United Nation, countries
contribute to it, but it acting independently. US$ 500k annually might
be enough for the initial operation.
We don't want linux evolved like unix, with linux_AIX, linux_Ultrix,
linux_sun, linux_sysv, linux_bsd, linux_new_redhat.....
People might comment that the problem with standard is too many
standards. But we do need some standard with linux.
Having standard so linux can have a better chance against other
operating systems.
/ming
Friedrich Lindenberg
> Like we have /bin, /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin.../sbin, /usr/sbin,
> /usr/local/sbin..., we should have some guideline as which is going
> where. For one, I don't like /lib and /lib/module sitting in /
> partition.
You can't change that --- and that has nothing to do with a standard
it's just bull****
> Having standard so linux can have a better chance against other
> operating systems.
most other os have standards, too.
Hi!
1. This is OT a bit here.
2. There _is_ a standards comitee: Linux standards Base ( www.linuxbase.org
) ... so please inform yourself before you start such an action.
cu
friedrich
James Knott
Ming He wrote:
--
To reply to this message, replace everything to the left of "@" with
james.knott.
grendel
"Ming He" <mi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3B89A09C...@hotmail.com...
Joost Kremers
news:3B89A09C...@hotmail.com...
> We need some sort of standard compatibillities among all flavours of
> linux.
something like <http://www.linuxbase.org/>, you mean?
--
Joost Kremers
j dot kremers at let dot kun dot nl
Running SuSE Linux 7.1 and loving it!
James Knott
> I totally agree. A standard GUI (GNOME maybe) would be nice as well.
Yuck!!!
What would be nice is a shell as powerfull as the OS/2 Workplace
Shell. There simply isn't another desktop anywhere that even comes
close to what it can do.
Bill Unruh
>"Ming He" <mi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3B89A09C...@hotmail.com...
>> We need some sort of standard compatibillities among all flavours of
>> linux.
It is there.
>>
>> Like we have /bin, /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin.../sbin, /usr/sbin,
>> /usr/local/sbin..., we should have some guideline as which is going
It is there.
>> where. For one, I don't like /lib and /lib/module sitting in /
>> partition.
Since the / patition is often the only thing loaded you need somewhee to put the
libraries needed which will with certainlty be on the / partition.
zephyos
> I totally agree. A standard GUI (GNOME maybe) would be nice as well.
The beauty of Linux is the choice it provides. Unlike windows, with
Linux you are not locked into the one boring interface. It is a
strength of Linux rather than a problem. By all means standardise the
directory structure but specifying a GUI is going to far.
Rick [Kitty5]
> The beauty of Linux is the choice it provides. Unlike windows, with
> Linux you are not locked into the one boring interface. It is a
> strength of Linux rather than a problem. By all means standardise the
> directory structure but specifying a GUI is going to far.
but when all of the real choices are in early beta at best, with a handful
of potential killer apps dithering between the two, with serious duplication
on both parts (sure I read somewhere that Linux was efficient, and
duplication was a windows ill .....)
a single standard gui - you can always customise the appearance of widget X,
lets not define widget X umpteen times in umpteen different ways
--
Rick
Kitty5 WebDesign - http://Kitty5.com
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://Povray.co.uk
TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
B.P.
"zephyos" <zep...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:4c501c1e.0109...@posting.google.com...
> "grendel" <gre...@grendel.com> wrote in message
news:<ayMk7.225066$J37.57...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>...
> > I totally agree. A standard GUI (GNOME maybe) would be nice as well.
>
> The beauty of Linux is the choice it provides. Unlike windows, with
> Linux you are not locked into the one boring interface. It is a
> strength of Linux rather than a problem. By all means standardise the
> directory structure but specifying a GUI is going to far.
Please stop spreading FUD, there are more windows shell replacements than
there are x window managers.
here is one of my favorites
And here are zillions more
Choices are based based upon knowledge. Assumptions are not knowing and
contain no power, therefore a choice cannot be made until the power of
knowledge is achieved.
B.P.
Brian
"B.P." wrote...
> Please stop spreading FUD, there are more windows shell
> placements than there are x window managers.
I don't think so.
> here is one of my favorites
How interesting, that site runs on RedHat Linux - guess they know their
OSes.
> And here are zillions more
Zillions? Really? Zillions?
This site is dead.
> Choices are based based upon knowledge. Assumptions are not
> knowing and contain no power, therefore a choice cannot be made
> until the power of knowledge is achieved.
Do you pretend to follow this philosophical principle?
Best regards,
Brian
Long-haired Linux Mystic
TiggerJim
for Linux. I can get other GUI's for windows but always end up with
problems due to the closed nature of windows.
Also I have to say, is, no standard GUI, I like to be able to choose
(Enlightenment at the moment). What I don't like is the additional
functioanlity added to the X-Windows core. When looking at programs
they are either GNOME, KDE, or X11. carn't we just have one level and
have the additional core funtionaliy in a standard addon to X-Windows.
I might be way off the mark with that staement since still getting use
to X-Windows, its just what I have noticed when looking for programs.
"grendel" <gre...@grendel.com> wrote in message news:<ayMk7.225066$J37.57...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>...
Rob French
It can be a pain sometimes that the different desktop environments (GNOME/KDE primarily, you could also say that Windowmaker and Enlightenment are effectively desktop environments in their own right) seem to use their own standards. Mainly this is just look and feel, but more significantly, in how the programs communicate with each other. That, to me, is the biggest downside. But, I prefer the different choices... so, I figure, deal with the kludges, if you want KDE programs to work with GNOME programs, put together some "glue" between them (I'm sure there's already some of that sort of thing). After all, that's one of the legendary *nix strengths, the ability to use the many small existing system tools together to make other things work.
So, if you love GNOME like me, but have a favorite KDE program that you like to use, do so! (I believe GNOME currently has a limited amount of support for KDE apps as well). If it's really bugging you that it doesn't interoperate quite the way you like, write something to make it happen... all the tools are freely available. Or if you're not a coder, somebody's probably already written it anyway :-P.
-Rob the long-winded