On 30-Jan-99 Kaare Rasmussen wrote:

...

This is what the Linux Standard Base (LSB) project is aiming to, and we are working on this together with the other distributors. It just takes some more time, it's a huge project. Have a look at <A HREF="http://www.linuxbase.org/"><A HREF="http://www.linuxbase.org/</A">http://www.linuxbase.org/</A</A>> for further info.

LSB is a nice effort. It may or may not succeed. What I'm worrying about is that for the average person, Linux == RedHat and more so if it comes preinstalled. Who will you sell an upgrade to if the people only knows another distro?

I hope LSB (or equivalent) will be achieved. I think it is essential at this stage of Linux evolution for there to be a standard which everyone can expect, no matter what distribution they choose to install. At present "Linux", by definition, simply means a Linux kernel plus whatever else you decide to bundle with it. Contrast it with FreeBSD, where this is defined by what is one the FreeBSD ftp site. What is required is a definitive file-system structure (including config files), a definitive configuration procedure, a definitive installation and upgrading mechanism, etc, and an absolutely standard linux "base" system. This should apply to different distributions (though any distribution is of course free to set itself aside but then must accept the consequences) and, as far as possible, should apply to any one distribution consistently over time. Now that Linux is being adopted by enterprises and institutions, and other setups whose primary interest is in getting work done, such people will want assurance that their choice of distribution will continue to be upgradeable and usable. They do not want to fear that their distribution may go out of date or have to be changed for another distribution. They do not want to lose days of productivity time while they move from distribution to incompatible distribution, or upgrade from version to incompatible version. At present, you cannot expect to safely install a new distribution with a different distribution in place. Even though Red Hat and SuSE both use RPM and are in many ways similar, there are enough basic differences for this to be very risky. The only safe way to move from one to the other is to back up everything you want to keep, and install the new one from scratch. Still less could you expect to safely install Debian or Slackware over an existing RH or SuSE (or vice versa). I remember (with reasons) the sequence of distributions I have been through since 1992. First, SLS 0.99 (good for its time, but it disappeared). Then MCC-Interim 1.0: good; but limited: so I moved to Slackware-1.0 (also good), but this became obsolete (a.out->ELF) after a couple of years, by which time Slackware was almost out of sight (Patrick Volkerding had quit). Debian has not quite reached 1.0 then, so I moved to RedHat-3.1. Then it was RedHat-4.1 which required a complete re-install because RPM ws upgraded to an incompatible version (which was what forced the upgrade anyway: it was no longer possible to install RH packages on RH-3.1 if they had been packaged with RPM for RH-4.1). Of course, RH-4.1 would only work properly if the many "upgrades" were installed to correct the bugs on the primary distribution. I might have gone on to RH-5, but this was late, and SuSE-5.0 came out: I looked at this, liked it, and then installed SuSE-5.1 definitively (I have been pretty pleased with this so far). Since then, SuSE-5.2 and 5.3 have come out. Since YaST upgraded incompatibly between 5.1 and 5.2, I have not upgraded yet: I might have gone for 5.3 but by then the libc5->glibc wave was breaking, so I'm waiting to see what will happen with SuSE-6.0. Since I use Linux to get work done, I shall be watching the experiences of the more adventurous: let others find the crevasses before I step on the glacier. Meanwhile, although RedHat-5.1 was apparently issued in too much of a hurry, people are saying good things about RH-5.2; indeed, I have a few friends who have been disappointed with SuSE-5.3, and have gone over to RH-5.2. And RH-5.2 is already glibc. So who knows what I shall be using in 6 months time? Now that is all very well for an individual running a small bunch of machines, prepared to "wait and see" and put up with limitations while doing so, and willing to get involved in the hassle of trying different distributions and putting right the problems with the chosen distribution. However, it is NOT going to appeal to businesses, institutions and enterprises. Quite recently, Linux is attracting a LOT of interest from these sectors, and they are going to favour any distribution which looks as though it has a large following, will continue to work reliably, will not fundamentally change, will continue to be straightforwardly ugradeable, and does NOT look as though it may -- at some unpredictable time -- become obsolete so that they have to strip everything out and install a different and incompatible distribution or alternatively upgrade their distribution from its current version to a newer incompatible version. So, in my book, the sooner the major distributions agree on what the core of a Linux system should consist of, the better. Otherwise, a distribution may be excellent but it will have only a minority following. On these grounds, though SuSE has many good features, on present trends it looks as though it may continue to lose ground to Red Hat. I could stick with it personally; but I would feel wary of recommending it to enterprises. (I hope SuSE are giving thought to making YaST more friendly to the new user, and less liable to plant traps for the unwary). And, by the way, am I not also hearing some good things about Slackware recently ... ?? Best wishes to all, Ted. -------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk> Date: 01-Feb-99 Time: 15:41:50 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------ - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archiv at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>