[GLLUG] Software Distribution

[Clay Dowling]

The biggest problem isn't actually that of processors, since compiling
for i386 will cover the vast majority of users.  The bigger problem is
that even different releases of the same distribution will sometimes use
incompatible library naming schemes.  A static build is an option, but
I've found even that to be a problem in some environments.

Clay

Eduardo Cesconetto wrote:
> Why not follow Apple's Universal Binary model?
> The biggest problem with Linux is that 80% of the developers thing
> "their" distro is the best one. End the flavors or reduce to a max of a
> handful and UB becomes possible.
> 
> 
> On Feb 17, 2008, at 8:19 AM, Mike wrote:
> 
>> I agree.  It'd be nice to have some processor independant executables
>> on Linux.
>>
>> Clay Dowling wrote:
>>> Richard Houser wrote:
>>> Windows certainly has many faults, and Microsoft seems to go out of
>>> their way to make things hard (web server & database admin come to
>>> mind).  But commercial software distribution is a lot easier, and
>>> commercial software distribution is what I am interested in.  It pays
>>> my bills.  And in the Linux world, I need to package my software
>>> differently for each distribution.  That gets old pretty fast, and
>>> makes it commercially impractical.  I speak from direct experience here.
>>> Clay
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-user mailing list
>> linux-user at egr.msu.edu
>> http://mailman.egr.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-user
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-user mailing list
> linux-user at egr.msu.edu
> http://mailman.egr.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-user


-- 
CeaMuS
http://www.ceamus.com
Simple Content Management