3 ms·
I've always thought that it was a bad idea for Linux distros to package any language libraries at all. It seems like a lot of repeated work and your users will
by poet 16y ago
I've always thought that it was a bad idea for Linux distros to package any language libraries at all. It seems like a lot of repeated work and your users will probably end up needing to install things manually in the end. Things will require the lastest version of gems, new and essential features will be added, etc. Just give your users a manual on how to install gems (or pip, or whatever) and let it be. The users of language libraries are exclusively programmers after all; I think it's safe to assume they can handle library installation.
That said, Zed is blowing this way out of proportion.
- davidw 16y ago> Just give your users a manual on how to install gems (or pip, or whatever) and let it be. Uh... that might work for one language, but for 10? 20? And some poor sysadmin is supposed to use all these disparate tools to install security fixes too? And you're forgetting that there are "end-user" programs that depend on those libraries as well, so they really do need to be packaged up. > That said, Zed is blowing this way out of proportion. That goes without saying.
- poet 16y agoAnd you're forgetting that there are "end-user" programs that depend on those libraries as well, so they really do need to be packaged up. I'm not forgetting this. I don't think the user's programs should use the same libraries (or even the same language install) that the distro's programs depend on. This way, if the user messed something up (like trying to upgrade a library), the entire distro wont be hosed. It's a really bad idea from a stability, security, and design standpoint if you don't keep these two things separate.