On Sat, 08 Oct 2011 10:37:16 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>> I especially like the way that installing one GNOME application
>>> installs the entire GNOME system, including the GNOME sound daemon.
>>> And all I actually wanted to do was run gedit...
>>
>> Just like installing an app on Windows that requires specific DLLs,
>> which require other components, which require .NET 3.5.
> 
> If you install something on Windows, one of three things happens:
> 
> 1. It just installs, and then works.
> 
> 2. It says "do you want me to download some stuff?" And it does, and
> then it installs.
> 
> 3. It says "I can't install. Please install .NET 2 first".
> 
> I've never figured out how to get out of dependency hell in Linux. Like,
> you ask it to install one tiny application, and it wants to install an
> entire ecosystem to support that. 

In Windows, you have the entire ecosystem to support it.  It's called 
"Windows".  In Linux, you have a choice of desktop environments.  If you 
want to run GNOME applications but are using KDE, you need the rest of 
the environment, because the desktop is interdependent with itself.

> I'm installing a GNOME application
> that doesn't require sound. Why the hell do I need to install the GNOME
> client/server audio transport system? And the GNOME scanner subsystem?

Because you pull in components for that "one tiny application that 
doesn't require sound" that have dependencies on the sound modules.

As a friend of mine who works for Microsoft said when I complained about 
Windows 7's insane use of disk space for 'caching' OS install files and 
the whole MSOCache, "What's the problem?  You can buy a 2 TB drive for 
under a hundred bucks - what's 30 GB of space to cache these install 
files?"

> And the GNOME Samba interface? And Samba? I just want to edit one damned
> text file! That's all I'm trying to do! Jesus...

No, you're trying to install an application to edit a text file, and that 
program has dependencies that have dependencies.

If you want a simple editor, look at nano, vi, or joe.  Small footprint, 
small dependency list.

> It's even more fun when it decides it needs a different version of
> "glibc". I have no idea what that is, but I do know that if you change
> it, your Linux will almost certainly never work ever again.

I'll leave it to you to google what glibc is. ;)

> I've never tried to install a Windows application and had to download 8
> GB of data, 

That's because in Windows you have one desktop environment, and one set 
of dependencies.  Choice comes with a cost.  If you don't want the 
choices, use Windows.  Or Mac.

> or had my entire Windows installation completely cease
> functioning to the point where I have to reinstall. 

"Orchid XP v8" - you once said that the "v8" indicated how many times you 
had reinstalled Windows XP.  So I call BS. ;)

> About the worst
> thing that can happen is that you need to install the .NET runtime.
> (Obviously, this problem is because .NET exists. If we could get rid of
> that, the problem would go away.)

It seems you'd be happier with statically linked executables.

Jim

Post a reply to this message