On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:40:23 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote
Finally some wise words. Thanks.
I think most posters so far totally underestimate the part of
the distribution. Distributing software as part of a distribution
is much more than just compiling the binary and putting it into
> > [GNU/] Linux is getting more user friendly,
Again, I think "Linux" stands for "some distributions".
> > and most users are not able to compile software,
> > plus some distributions make it specially hard (debian, ubuntu,
Space is _not_ the reason for these splits. On Unix it's perfectly
ok to have several versions of a library installed in parallel. But it's
not possible to install several versions of the header files in parallel.
Thats a result of the way C handles includes.
> > Releasing software on windows or mac, even open-source, *always*
I found that part amusing. Does the OP really claim a toolchain that
can create binaries tha run native on 32bit inteloids as well as on
64 bit AMD/Intel. Will his binary run on my PPC (Mac Mini, great tool
to run Aeolus). Not even speaking of the plentitude of (binary-incompatible)
ARM processors. And do theses binaries magically create MMX/SSE/SSE2 instructions
on thoses CPUs that don't have them? Or are we blessed with binaries with
all optimizations dissabled?
Such a toolchain is either fantastic or ridiculous.
N.B.: I love the idea of "More binaries for small and obscure software, ..."
Yeah - obscure software (from obscure websites?), as a binary blob. Just
double-click to install (and, pleeeease, run it a root :-)
I'm getting old :-/
R. Mattes -
Hochschule fuer Musik Freiburg
Linux-audio-dev mailing list