Commentary

Serdar Yegulalp
 

Some Linux Critiques By Way Of A Solaris Dissenter

Not long after my post about the newest rev of OpenSolaris, a programmer friend called me to dissent. He'd tried OpSol, too, found it sorely lacking, and from his comments I found a criticism that now applies to Linux as well.

Not long after my post about the newest rev of OpenSolaris, a programmer friend called me to dissent. He'd tried OpSol, too, found it sorely lacking, and from his comments I found a criticism that now applies to Linux as well.


More Software Insights

White Papers

More >>

Reports

More >>

Webcasts

More >>

Since my friend's a programmer, he sat down with OpenSolaris from a programmer's point of view -- and most of what he saw missing were things that a programmer would have needed. Not just asked for, needed, or otherwise found it very difficult to cobble together from scratch. The word he used most often was broken, which is not something you want to hear coming out of a programmer's mouth.

Biggest gripe for him: the lack of dev tools included by default. He had to go dig up the Sun Studio C++ compiler, the Boost libraries and put all of those together by hand, just so he could then sit down to the task of compiling the software he was going to write. And, of course, he was disgusted by the lack of AC'97 audio, and lousy codec support in general.

All of this talk made me think about one of the chief difficulties in putting together a distribution. When you set up a distro and its attendant software repositories, you have to assume some degree of responsibility for everything that goes in there. Every single app has to be vetted and policed to make sure it works with the distribution. That includes everything up to and including the big, staple applications like OpenOffice and Firefox.

That might in turn go a long way towards explaining why, when you pick up a given distribution, some of the biggest and most important programs in it are a revision or two behind the times. Not because the maintainers are lazy, but because there's a finite number of such people and they only have X hours in the day (unpaid hours, sometimes) to crossbar-test what they can and make sure it works.

A Linux/Solaris/BSD distribution is a whole ecosystem, and that's one of the problems with the state of the whole thing right now. It's got too little in common, by design, with other distributions. The sheer weight of the project, the burden of maintaining things that by all rights should have been made at least halfway automatic ages ago, falls on too few shoulders.

The end result is what I have come with a heavy heart to realize is one of Linux's (and by extension, Solaris's and BSD's) ongoing tragedies: The price of diversity is eternal incompleteness. Since it's still next to impossible to provide a single binary package that is distribution-neutral, and compiling from source is still not as automatic a process as you'd like to think it is (Gentoo notwithstanding), the end result is that if you pick a distro, you're stuck with what's in it in more ways than one.

I was hoping Solaris would be different, but it seems they, too, are simply waiting for someone else to come along and do all the heavy lifting. Again.

InformationWeek Analytics has published an independent analysis of the current state of open source adoption. Download the report here (registration required).

Follow me and the rest of InformationWeek on Twitter.


Related Reading




Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

InformationWeek encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, InformationWeek moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. InformationWeek further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
T-Shirt Giveaway T-Shirt Giveaway: Each week we're selecting one great comment from our readers. The author of the comment will receive an InformaitonWeek Community t-shirt. So get posting!
Subscribe to RSS

Resource Links