| 1 |
On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 02:29:12 +0300, Mike Myers <fluffymikey@×××××.com> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> I'm sure others will disagree, but I really think if Gentoo is going to |
| 5 |
> become a cornerstone in the desktop's replacement (like for thin clients) |
| 6 |
> then there should probably be an option for a binary 'version' of |
| 7 |
> portage. |
| 8 |
> Gentoo is great in so many ways, but having to compile everything is |
| 9 |
> sometimes just very unnecessary. I mean it's great if you want to teak |
| 10 |
> your |
| 11 |
> desktop, but it's just time consuming on a server or a slower embedded |
| 12 |
> machine, and worst of all there's no benefit for compiling things in |
| 13 |
> those |
| 14 |
> areas. The other problem thing that will hold it back, I believe |
| 15 |
> anyway, is |
| 16 |
> the constant updating instead of release cycles. This can make |
| 17 |
> administration very harsh on a system that you can only access remotely. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
AFAIK Gentoo is a meta-distribution. That is, its goal is to make it |
| 21 |
easier to create other distributions. When somebody installs Gentoo, |
| 22 |
compiles packages, and uses the resulting binaries for whatever purpose, |
| 23 |
there is a possibility to wrongfully conclude that the Gentoo distribution |
| 24 |
is being used by an end user. In fact, it has been used by a distribution |
| 25 |
developer to create a customized distribution which in its own turn has |
| 26 |
been used by an end user, while the fact that the distro developer and the |
| 27 |
end user are the same person is mere coincidence. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Is it still true? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
If it is still true, then why should Gentoo, as represented by its |
| 32 |
developers, care if there are any servers too busy to compile anything and |
| 33 |
too deep in production to allow for testing upgrades? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Indeed, how can Gentoo distribute binary packages when it does not know |
| 36 |
your CFLAGS and USE? One answer could be to run a server that takes CFLAGS |
| 37 |
and USE returning the resulting binary package. The server can be run by |
| 38 |
the Gentoo Foundation if it finds that the idea has business sense, but |
| 39 |
this issue is transcendental to Gentoo as a Distribution. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
How can Gentoo test if an update brakes something when it does not know |
| 42 |
the state of the system before the update? Possibly it could, if the |
| 43 |
portage tree had versions and users were severely limited in what |
| 44 |
configuration changes they can do. But how is it different from creating |
| 45 |
another distribution that is just based on Gentoo like Ubuntu is based on |
| 46 |
Debian? |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
>> How |
| 49 |
>> could |
| 50 |
>> Gentoo increase its market share if such a potential future is to occur, |
| 51 |
>> or |
| 52 |
>> even better: how could Gentoo Foundation become pivotal in making it |
| 53 |
>> happen |
| 54 |
>> while retaining its values. |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Does Gentoo Foundation need greater market share? My impression is that |
| 58 |
developers need more good developers, not home users. I do not know what |
| 59 |
the Trustees want to achieve, but I guess that influence can be measured |
| 60 |
not only in the number of users, but also by the probability that Gentoo |
| 61 |
patches are accepted upstream, the number of application developers that |
| 62 |
release ebuilds, and the number of distributions that are based on or |
| 63 |
using Gentoo (really do not know how to find out if Gentoo is used by |
| 64 |
other distribution developers). |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
> |
| 67 |
> As far as typical home users go, they don't really buy into things unless |
| 68 |
> it's easy to use. Mainly because they are wanting a tool to accomplish a |
| 69 |
> task. If Gentoo can provide that tool, then getting it into the living |
| 70 |
> room |
| 71 |
> wouldn't be a big deal. As it is now, unfortunately, Gentoo is not |
| 72 |
> designed |
| 73 |
> to be 'easy to use' in the sense of the average user's experience. Once |
| 74 |
> it |
| 75 |
> is, then it will be easier to market. I like the ability to tinker with |
| 76 |
> Gentoo, but I just wish it wasn't a requirement to use it. |
| 77 |
> |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
I agree that a pretty good easy to use distribution for typical home users |
| 80 |
can be built with Gentoo. I do not care if it is built or not, but if it |
| 81 |
will make Gentoo more "healthy" or pleases Gentoo developers or Trustees |
| 82 |
in whatever way, I wish it is built. I do not want current Gentoo |
| 83 |
developers to spend their valuable time building such a distribution. |
| 84 |
|
| 85 |
-- |
| 86 |
Andrei Gerasimenko |
| 87 |
-- |
| 88 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives