>>>> Seriously?
>>>>
>>>> The Windows XP CD holds less than 650 MB of data. (It's a CD.)
>>>
>>> Oh, so you want to compare a modern Linux distribution against Windows
>>> from 10-ish years ago?  *Really*?
>>
>> I'm comparing Linux against the Windows release that most people are
>> currently using.
>
> A more appropriate comparison is latest against latest.

I don't know how big the latest version of Windows is. I've never 
installed it. More to the point, I don't know of anybody who's using it yet.

>> It's still frustrating that I have to download multiple GB of data for
>> libraries that I'm not actually going to use, just because the package
>> dependency system isn't a little more fine-grained.
>
> You don't know that you're not going to use them.

That's an absurd argument.

If the PC doesn't have a sound card then I know, for a fact, that I 
don't need the sound daemon. If there are no Windows machines on the 
network then I know, for a fact, that I don't need Samba. I could go on.

The only reason that installing a text editor installs multi-GB of 
unrelated stuff is because dependency tracking is too coarse.

> If you want something more specialized, you can do a custom roll-your-own
> with SUSE Studio.  No need to download anything you don't want, because
> you build the distribution on a remote system using a web browser, test
> it, and then download it.

Now that's what I'm talking about... That sounds actually useful.

>> Yes. Because spending a week trying to fix something it *totally* the
>> same as just giving up and complaining about it. Oh, wait...
>
> You spent a week trying to fix something that had you asked a question in
> an online forum, you probably could've gotten an answer for in a day or
> two.
>
> And then you complained that you couldn't figure it out.
>
> Yeah, ultimately, you gave up without asking for help.  If you'd asked
> for help, someone probably would've been able to help you.

1. You're assuming that it's /possible/ to fix this.

2. You're assuming that had I asked, somebody would have actually 
bothered to reply. And that their reply would have been helpful.

>> Again, I didn't say Linux sucks. I said one specific aspect of it sucks.
>
> An aspect you didn't ask any questions about, but beat your head against
> the desk for a week without asking for help.

We seem to be crossed here slightly. (For amusement, go compute what 
time of day it was in my time zone when I wrote this...)

I spent a week trying to fix my dad's failed OpenSUSE upgrade. The 
statement above was referring to the granularity of dependency 
management, which is a different topic.

>> Now, to me, if the only way to make a system work is to find a
>> super-expert to explain it, then it's not a very good system. If only
>> the distribution developers themselves have enough insider knowledge to
>> figure out how to work the package manager, then it's not a terribly
>> good system. Just, you know, my opinion. Feel free to disagree...
>
> You don't need a super expert to explain it.  You need someone with more
> knowledge than you have to explain it.  Plenty of normal everyday non-
> technical end users manage to use it without problems.

As I say, I can get Linux to /work/ OK. Indeed, my dad still uses it on 
a daily basis. It's just that one or two things - like getting the 
package manager to install just the packages I actually need - are 
annoyingly fiddly.

Post a reply to this message