...which, as I mentioned, are generally...not good. Anyway, as I said, it's still too glib an answer. Different distributions package things differently; that's the basic raison d'etre of distributions. Then each distribution has a user base who supports that distribution's way of doing things.
To take another example. Say an app has an optional dependency on a certain library. On the one hand, if you build against that library, you get a cool feature - but if you don't, you save the requirement.
A 'lean' distribution will want to not build against the library. A 'full fat' distribution will want to build against it. How do you reconcile that in the One True Package? You can't.
That's just another tiny example. The fundamental point is, multiple distributions exist because there are multiple valid perspectives on the best way to do things, which can't be adequately addressed in One True Package Set that everyone uses.
Posted Dec 3, 2008 8:40 UTC (Wed) by avik (subscriber, #704)
[Link]
Use a plugin architecture.
I agree with your point, however.
Losses at Mandriva
Posted Dec 3, 2008 9:43 UTC (Wed) by jamesh (subscriber, #1159)
[Link]
What do you do if the application doesn't use a plugin architecture? Do you boycott it until they rewrite things so that a single binary can fit all situations?
Losses at Mandriva
Posted Dec 4, 2008 15:20 UTC (Thu) by avik (subscriber, #704)
[Link]
You work with upstream to add a plugin architecture. In the same way, if there's a bug, you fix it upstream to avoid duplication of effort.
Losses at Mandriva
Posted Dec 5, 2008 0:37 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
And if upstream says 'plugins? No way!' or is just impossible to work
with? (This is not academic: I can name several such projects, some of
critical importance, alas)...