Gentoo Linux

[Bradley J. Bartram]

I think this is a really great point, but as any successful business will 
tell you, there is more than a small value in correctly marketing and 
distributing a product.

If all distros are using the same base packages, has linux splintered?  I'm 
not so sure.  If I want to set up a name server, I can grab the latest bind 
release, compile and run on any Linux.  I can expect mostly the same 
functionality of any of the distros.  The key differences are really 
cosmetic.  For example, Slack has a bare bones installer, Red Hat has 
Linuxconf and other administrative tools, Mandrake has the *Drake tools which 
take Redhat a step farther.  There are different package managers which work 
better than some worse than others (ie., RPM, URPMI, Apt, etc.)

These differences are designed and then marketed to the target audience.  I 
don't see a problem with something like gentoo as there's more to Linux than 
the coders.  Even Linus said he had no grand plans for his creation, he gave 
it away because he sucked at marketing.  The coder wrote it, then the 
businessmen sold it (Linus -> Distro Companies).

Everyone involved in Linux contributes to the overall success of the system 
in their own way.  Coders write the software, writers write the documentation 
and how-tos, users test the software and make recommendations or they use the 
software and tell their friends and associates, and businesses package and 
polish and sell what they do.  Its a circle of improvement.

I do agree that there seems to be too many distros out there, but in time, 
market forces will eliminate the weakest of them and only the strongest most 
financially viable companies will be left.  The hobbiest will always be there 
creating and improving as they have since the beginning.

I might have gotten off topic on this.  I'm not trying to rant or to flame.  
This subject seems to come up often and the common opinion always seems to be 
that if one doesn't code, they don't contribute and there are a lot more than 
coders involved making linux what it is.

brad

On Wednesday 03 April 2002 03:36 am, you wrote:
> OK,
> Well I feel that I have to add my $.02 worth here..
> One of the problems I see facing Linux has already been done.  Unix
> splintered off into separate groups that did "their own thing" back
> when.  I see this already happening to Linux.  I am ALL for open source, it
> just bothers me that all these "wannabe's" will make their own distro which
> is just a collection of work that they didn't do or contribute to, yet they
> wanna make money from it.
> Yes, it is perfectly acceptable  by the terms of GNU copyleft, but that
> still doesn't make it right.  If I did nothing but collected what is needed
> to build a 'basic' Linux box, with no appreciable additions, I would feel
> like a heel by charging for that, regardless that 'my time is money'.
>
> I think the FHS  NEEDS to become a reality, and that Every linux distro
> follow it, standardization is not necessarily a bad thing.  It will only
> make us stronger in the long run if it doesn't matter that 'so & so'
> learned on Debian or RH or Slackware, as long as the FHS is in place, then
> the files that matter will be where they should be.
>
> That is one of the strengths of proprietary systems, things are where you
> expect them to be, each time/every time.
>
> Just my $.02
>
> Chaz®