| |||||||||||||
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release modelUbuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release modelPosted Mar 1, 2013 3:17 UTC (Fri) by ericc72 (guest, #41737)In reply to: Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model by heijo Parent article: Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model
I think this is possibly a great idea
Btw (in response to one of your responders), Gobo Linux seems dead, and I know NixOS is kind of new and experimental (hopefully they can try out some interesting stuff and see how it goes.)
It would be cool if packages could be packaged "upstream" or from the vendor where they could run on most distros because there was enough ABI compatibility that things just worked with these kinds of self-contained packages (if that were the case, more 3rd party paid apps might be release for the platform.)
I think OSX does things kind of like that with .app folders that are self-contained and exist in the /Applications folder off of root (meaning, everything is packaged in the .app folder.)
I never took too close a look at OSX Homebrew, but this seems pretty interesting as well:
http://mxcl.github.com/homebrew/
I'm not a big fan of the OSX UI (the UI itself is okay, but when I click the green maximize button, I want fully maximized - I also really like the Windows 7 snap feature and cannot live without it on OSX when I am forced to use.) Nor do I like the walled Apple garden. Bring on Wayland and what I imagine will be some great ideas on the desktop once more mainstream (sorry, lots of talented people probably don't want to waste their time on outdated graphic stacks, but once something modern becomes more the norm, watch out, I bet we see some cool stuff -- this is not to say there are not talented people working on Linux desktop stuff, only saying it will be much more appealing once this transition more solidifies.)
But innovation in other means of packaging and all that, bring it on I say. There is room for some really cool ideas. And I think the current directory structure can coexist with something like the above.
(Log in to post comments)
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 1, 2013 5:26 UTC (Fri) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
>I'm not a big fan of the OSX UI (the UI itself is okay, but when I click the green maximize button, I want fully maximized - I also really like the Windows 7 snap feature and cannot live without it on OSX when I am forced to use.)
You can use http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/cinch/ for that. I think "maximize" can also be fixed by an extension.
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 1, 2013 5:45 UTC (Fri) by ericc72 (guest, #41737) [Link]
Thanks for the tips. A quick search reveals some options. No different I suppose on my Win setup where I tweak quit a bit and run utilities that enhance the experience.
That said, I'm interested to see what sort of desktop innovation comes out of having a modern graphics "stack". I actually really like Linux in many ways, but there are things that get in the way of my "workflow". To have an awesome desktop (and I know for many it already is) that runs on the same underlying core that runs (my) server stuff, that will be great. Yeah, I can do it now, but there are still some nuances that are annoying (not that for Windows not using UTF-8 by default and CRLF line feed issues are not annoying too!)
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 1, 2013 13:32 UTC (Fri) by renox (subscriber, #23785) [Link]
> That said, I'm interested to see what sort of desktop innovation comes out of having a modern graphics "stack".
*Sigh* I wouldn't hold my breath: Wayland is a low level evolution which will simplify maintenance of the low level GUI stack for its developers, so for them it's a nice improvement but I see no reason why it would provide "desktop innovation".
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 1, 2013 20:56 UTC (Fri) by ericc72 (guest, #41737) [Link]
I hear what you are saying. I guess what I am thinking, or maybe hoping, is that the reality of a more modern graphics stack will "inspire" so new lower-level toolkit stuff or whatever. Maybe some really cool, simple, yet effective window managers, etc. in addition to desktop environment things. Basically, the fact that whatever gets created can now use a modern graphics stack with much better (graphic related) performance, might just inspire some stuff. Maybe even the same workflow stuff, but better (I don't mind the classic style desktop.) Just a more polished experience maybe.
Not a not not pun Posted Mar 4, 2013 9:33 UTC (Mon) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] not that for Windows not using UTF-8 by default and CRLF line feed issues are not annoying too!Not that triple negatives cannot be said to not be becoming uncommon :)
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 1, 2013 17:32 UTC (Fri) by tjc (subscriber, #137) [Link] Thanks for the link. I didn't try Cinch, not liking that sort of thing much in Cinnamon, but SizeUp is really nice — it helps relieve some of OS X's inherent "Steveness."
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 7, 2013 16:41 UTC (Thu) by fatrat (subscriber, #1518) [Link]
Since this is an OSS forum, there's also Slate
https://github.com/jigish/slate
which does the same sorts of things and is OSS. I use it daily.
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 1, 2013 12:27 UTC (Fri) by fdrs (subscriber, #85858) [Link]
You can use Warp and BetterTouchTool, and you ll have a quite usable MacOSX system.
I don´t use it anymore , as I do _really_ prefer using Linux as my desktop, but, after installing those tools, MacOS became quite usable.
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 1, 2013 16:51 UTC (Fri) by dashesy (subscriber, #74652) [Link]
.app folders are not that special, they use some rpath trickery to separate the applications, and of course plist files. It can easily be done in Linux too, just use rpath and $ORIGIN properly.
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 1, 2013 23:21 UTC (Fri) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]
> some rpath trickery
Ha! OS X has the most complicated rpath logic I've ever seen. The library has to declare that it supports rpath for anything to apply, which seems…backwards. Not to mention that libA.dylib having "libB.dylib" as a dependent library is resolved relative to the executable opening libA.dylib, and not at all relative to libA.dylib :( . I can see why no one wants to rely on anyone else setting the paths via otool properly and instead just ships everything they need.
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 2, 2013 0:02 UTC (Sat) by dashesy (subscriber, #74652) [Link]
Yes, it is backward. Since 10.5 OSX has @rpath that more resembles Linux rpath however. I am not an expert in OSX but had to do some fiddling when porting some library. This is what I figured out, if libA.dylib depends on @rpath/libB.dylib (shown in otool -L) then you can use install_name_tool to add_rpath of @loader_path/. which should make the path relative to libA.dylib.
|
|||||||||||||