RE: Future of Linux
--- Begin Message ---
Alan Cox wrote:
> > What else will the lsb cover? Or has there been a decision about that
> > yet?
> The only other stuff covered at the meeting was X11. The good work XFree
> does is a big help there as their binary interfaces and the X specification
> API's are both stable. Motif has been raised as a question, as has
I think it is unwize at this point to make LSB conserned with X11R6
standards. Of course it should/could comply with what X11R6, but I
think there is significan merit to the comments by Jim Gettys about
replacing X with an X2 situation where all applications/widgets are
universally reading themes/styles from diffrent libs to allow more
seemless application integeration to a user defined "look" as discribed
Therefore I think LSB should focus on more basic issues like making FHS
compliant, sysV vs BSD init standards, and libs.
Compilers are also an issue I feel strongly about. I think gcc and egcs
are awsome, but no match (yet) for commercial compilers.
And, if I may, hit on the issue of piracy. Although a strongly
unpopular idea I know, I have been thinking more and more deeply about
this issue. Let me paste and old draft of something I am working on
Shit, I can't find it. Yes, I have drank a lot tonight. But basically,
it ammounts to this:
Every ISV complains about piracy.
Some major software vendors that are vital (proof provide in draft I
can't find) only port to things like SGI/IRIX where they can use
key/serialnumber to allow one system only installs.
therefore if: Linux/hardware allowed Serial number on hardware,
accessable in OS
then: ISV's would LOVE to port to linux because there would be no
piracy, and they would have a better/secure sales expectation.
It is interesting, InSight is a case in point, desperately needed and
continously purchaced for $2000+ a year by almost every Chemistry
department in the world, but only runs on SGI/IRIX stuff.
Anyhow, that would also give GNU a shot in the arm, if you can't pirate
it, you WANT a free version, so, instant motivation!
> ESR also raised the question of standardising things like
> Python. The suggestion for that was that the python people ought to
> define any such standard and then the lsb issue is purely one of namespace
> ie "lsb-python-..." shall be Python meeting he following criteria, with
> the following options etc.
Not a bad idea, the "lsb-..." for more than python. The idea being, if
a end user downloads it, they can install it and use it on _ANY_ linux
box (reguardless of OS and Hardware).
> This is so that every app doesnt install their own version of python
> "just in case". That could be extended to all interpreters and some
> libraries probably and a farmed out approach would IMHO be good.
Ooo. to deep for me tonight. I'll get back to that.
"Robert W. Current" <firstname.lastname@example.org> - email
http://www.current.nu - my server (looking for a good
site to host)
"Hey mister, turn it on, turn it up, and turn me loose." - Dwight Yoakam
--- End Message ---