[PLUG] Linux Distros

[Jeme A Brelin]

On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Matt Alexander wrote:
> I've never built an RPM, but I've heard that Debian is not "far more
> advanced", it's just that the people making .debs put a little more
> effort into making them work well, whereas RPM builders, on the whole
> are slightly more careless.

And you should ask yourself, "Why is that?"

I think the reason is at least two-fold:  First, the Debian project
maintains an official repository of packages that have been checked and
rechecked by committed members of the community to ensure that the
packages adhere to the strict guidelines in the Debian documentation.  
Second, the Debian project uses specific package maintainers who are
committed personally to the success of the project while Red Hat packages
are either produced by wage slaves or hobbyists whose primary motivation
is just to bust out something that works "good enough" for a majority of
installations.

This concept can be generalized into the idea that people working for
wages do just enough to get by while people who work for either love or
necessity do as much as they possibly can.

Also, the superiority of the system is not merely in the packages and
their structure, but the package management tools that allow, within the
Debian system, a user or administrator to download, install, and configure
a package and all of its dependent packages with a single command.

> But then again, since you've mentioned many times that you don't use
> any packaging system, but instead build from source, I'm wondering if
> you are able to provide any details as to why .debs are "far more
> advanced."

How'd I do?

> > Ethical:  Debian is a community-based project.  The purpose of Debian is
> > to both create a strong and versatile Free Software operating system (or
> > set of operating systems) and a strong and versatile Free Software
> > community.  Debian draws hard lines between packages which are Free and
> > non-Free.
> 
> I don't think any of the other distros are really any different in
> this regard.  They all want a strong community.  And Red Hat
> complained recently about licensing restrictions on StarOffice.

Yes, they all WANT a strong community.  Surely the strong community is
good for Red Hat's profits.  That's where morality comes in.  To me,
ethics is a determination of right and wrong and morals are a
determination of motivation to do right or wrong.

The question then is, "What are they doing about it?"

Debian is structuring itself AS that community of involved human beings
who are committed to building a great system for the sake of having a
great system and making it available to all people for all time.

Red Hat is complaining about licenses because a good office package would
boost their saleability and, hence, their profits.

Which stands on higher ground?

> Just out of curiosity, do you have a job?

Nope.

> Or would that compromise your beliefs?

As I've written a thousand times, the entire reason we should be looking
toward alternatives to the structure of our current economy and society is
the inherent, required exploitation of a system based on greed,
selfishness, and fear.  Note the word "required".

I wrote just today that it's unfortunate that we must work within this
abusive, destructive system in some (perhaps many, certainly too many)
capacity in order to simply maintain the struggle against it.  Therefore,
it is necessary, from time to time, to allow a capitalist to exploit my
labor for his personal profit so that I can simply sustain myself.

To put it bluntly, it is necessary for the vast majority to find some way
to please the wealthy minority in order to continue to survive.  The most
reliable way to please the wealthy is to help them accrue more wealth.

Sick, isn't it?

J.
-- 
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme at brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org