* List: alug@stu.uea.ac.uk
On Sat, Jul 03, 1999 at 08:32:56PM +0100, James Green wrote:
- List: alug@stu.uea.ac.uk
Hey, let me start upsetting the list ;)
"Looking forward to the New Dawn" http://linuxtoday.com/stories/7362.html
[...]
Whaddaya think?
(A bit more proof-reading would have been good for such a high-profile location. I think this is also a failing of the editorship of major linux websites at present.)
The fragmentation may be GNU/Linux's main point of frustration. A home user may offer a friend help in setting up their printer, but he knows the KDE method, not the GNOME method, and since the friend's parents have both just got to like GNOME they aren't keen on messing about getting KDE to work just to set up a printer.
This sums up my problem with the article (as well as highlighting why I think the current fad for desktop environments is a wrong turn that we will be cursed with correcting at a later date).
Linux[1] is all about choice, but it's also all about consistency. To take your example above, configuration files are[3] text files[4] living under /etc and it's a fairly simple task to find /etc/printcap to configure the printer and follow the trail from there to the various printer subsystems (eg ghostscript). To place a GUI abstraction on this and expect it to cope with everything is a wrong turn.
Yes, you need to understand the structure of the system, probably having a book to hand in the early days, but it does all have reason, a kind of logic to it. A modern computer system is an incredibly complex thing and this complexity is reflected in the configuration system, whether you see it (Linux) or not (Windows).
Arguing for a removal of choice (as you appear to earlier, although you also seem to argue against) or for concealment of the complexity (in the quoted paragraph) is to argue against Linux.
Long live diversity. The corporates may never realise it, but we're doing them a favour. Individuals will appreciate the power to be individuals again.
Long live diversity!
Endnotes
1. The existence of Daemon/Linux[2] comprehensively shows that we shouldn't call it GNU/Linux, however much we admire the GNU project.
2. Linux with all GNU parts replaced with BSD equivalents. Strictly not ready for real work yet.
3. Read "should be", ref http://www.pathname.com/fhs/
4. Occasionally text files are compiled to dbs (eg sendmail aliases) for speed.