4 ms·

> So Linux as an OS does not do dependency management - you have to stay within a third party tool/package manager. Thanks for proving my point. Debian is an O

by mst 13y ago

> So Linux as an OS does not do dependency management - you have to stay within a third party tool/package manager. Thanks for proving my point. Debian is an OS. Linux is a kernel. Within a debian (or ubuntu) install, dpkg/apt-get are a first party tool, supplied as part of the operating system. So debian, as an OS, does do dependency management. I'd include a mirror "thanks for proving" comment here but I don't want to lower myself to your level of supercilious condescension. The multiple upstream repository problems you describe are very real, though - the nix approach avoids a lot of the upgrade-related problems but still relies on a curated channel of compatible versions, although given the capacity to have multiple versions of things installed relying on multiple such channels will be safe for the user, and the disadvantages at that point largely accrue to the effort required of the curator.

ksk 13y ago
I don't consider the package manager tool-set to be part of the OS. Certainly it is part of a distribution much like other tools are. There is some amount of pedanticness involved when it comes to differentiating the common use of Linux as an OS, Linux as a kernel, Linux distributions, etc. I was using "Linux OS" as a catch all for the kernel + whatever to make it boot to a console. FYI condescension is reserved for intentionally dishonest replies - which I did detect earlier from the other poster.
- mst 13y ago
  I think the 'distribution' concept mostly exists because Linux is just a kernel - I consider the whole thing the OS, especially given apt-get is how I mostly get my kernels. To my mind, Slackware is an OS that chooses not to ship something of the order of apt-get, rather than separating 'OS' from 'distribution'. But given you're (by default) booting Debian's choice of Linux kernel, and Debian's choice of userland, all tied together by the dependency resolution of Debian's shipped package manager, which is what provided you with said kernel ... I still think calling it a third-party tool is silly. Or at least, I see Debian as the first-party rather than Linux here, and I think the fact that your way of looking at it is ... well, "not how I commonly see things regarded" ... the problem wasn't so much dishonesty as a complete failure to realise you were using a different communication protocol. Never attribute to dishonesty that which can be adequately explained by terminology mismatches :)
- rantanplan 13y ago
  You're a riot. I was not dishonest in the slightest. The part which you "detected"(more like you needed something to evade answering) as dishonest was me saying "If you work in the CS industry..." which everyone understood as "If someone works in the industry" and not you specifically! But yeah, of course, you prefered to think of it as if I was putting words in your mouth. Pfft. Nevermind that you twisted every answer I gave you with your denial and ignorance. At least everyone else sees who's dishonest and vote with their 'downvote' button. Internet is like that sometimes.

by mst 13y ago

ksk 13y ago

I don't consider the package manager tool-set to be part of the OS. Certainly it is part of a distribution much like other tools are. There is some amount of pedanticness involved when it comes to differentiating the common use of Linux as an OS, Linux as a kernel, Linux distributions, etc. I was using "Linux OS" as a catch all for the kernel + whatever to make it boot to a console. FYI condescension is reserved for intentionally dishonest replies - which I did detect earlier from the other poster.

mst 13y ago
I think the 'distribution' concept mostly exists because Linux is just a kernel - I consider the whole thing the OS, especially given apt-get is how I mostly get my kernels. To my mind, Slackware is an OS that chooses not to ship something of the order of apt-get, rather than separating 'OS' from 'distribution'. But given you're (by default) booting Debian's choice of Linux kernel, and Debian's choice of userland, all tied together by the dependency resolution of Debian's shipped package manager, which is what provided you with said kernel ... I still think calling it a third-party tool is silly. Or at least, I see Debian as the first-party rather than Linux here, and I think the fact that your way of looking at it is ... well, "not how I commonly see things regarded" ... the problem wasn't so much dishonesty as a complete failure to realise you were using a different communication protocol. Never attribute to dishonesty that which can be adequately explained by terminology mismatches :)
rantanplan 13y ago
You're a riot. I was not dishonest in the slightest. The part which you "detected"(more like you needed something to evade answering) as dishonest was me saying "If you work in the CS industry..." which everyone understood as "If someone works in the industry" and not you specifically! But yeah, of course, you prefered to think of it as if I was putting words in your mouth. Pfft. Nevermind that you twisted every answer I gave you with your denial and ignorance. At least everyone else sees who's dishonest and vote with their 'downvote' button. Internet is like that sometimes.