Folks, Saw this on /. and wondered if anybody had tried it yet? Also wondered if I stood a chance of getting it to work on my Thinkpad T20 running last version of Redhat (9.0)? Would getting the tarball and building it on the machine work any better than stepping into rpm hell with the binary?
I'm running it on my mac; it's ok, not that bad. Still a bit buggy in places, and it runs a little slow at time, but works for the most part.
Josh
On 12/3/06, Jonathan Hutchins hutchins@tarcanfel.org wrote:
On Sunday 03 December 2006 10:10, lowell wrote:
Would getting the tarball and building it on the machine work any better than stepping into rpm hell with the binary?
RPM Hell? Where are you living, 1992? Use up2date or yum.
Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
Or better yet, use a rpm-less distro.
:-)
From: Jonathan Hutchins hutchins@tarcanfel.org To: kclug@kclug.org Subject: Re: Democracy TV Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2006 14:37:53 -0600
On Sunday 03 December 2006 10:10, lowell wrote:
Would getting the tarball and building it on the machine work any better than stepping into rpm hell with the binary?
RPM Hell? Where are you living, 1992? Use up2date or yum.
Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
_________________________________________________________________ Get free, personalized commercial-free online radio with MSN Radio powered by Pandora http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001
On Sunday 03 December 2006 10:10, lowell wrote:
Would getting the tarball and building it on the machine work any better than stepping into rpm hell with the binary?
RPM Hell? Where are you living, 1992? Use up2date or yum.
On Sunday 03 December 2006 16:12, Dale Beams wrote:
Or better yet, use a rpm-less distro.
How would that be better?
Seriouly, "RPM Hell" is nothing but FUD. The RPM system was designed to get you OUT of dependency hell by telling you up front what packages you needed. With on-line repositories came RPM management scripts that handled finding those dependencies for you, and that was a LONG time ago.
All software systems have dependencies. The only possible alternative is to include redundant code in all software packages. What I can't understand is why people would rather find out about missing dependencies through a failed compile rather than be told up front "you're going to need this list of additional files". Download, make, fail, download, make, fail seems pretty stupid to me, and I've been there.
People who talk about "RPM Hell" are mostly those who never bothered to learn anything about the RPM system, and quite possibly were new to linux when they had their problems. Experience gained on other distros led them to believe RPM was to blame for their troubles, which were more likely self-induced. They developed loyalty to the other distro, and possibly due to RedHat's commercialism enjoy spreading FUD about a perfectly good distro and an excellent package management tool.
That said, I think there are better distributions around these days than Fedora, including several excellent RPM based ones.
On Sun, 2006-12-03 at 10:10 -0600, lowell wrote:
Folks, Saw this on /. and wondered if anybody had tried it yet?
I have tried it; it's too slow. Unfortunately they implemented the entire UI and computational logic in an interpreted scripting language. So, all the flashy spinning animations eat 100% CPU and cause exeptionally slow response. On top of that load, it's also a Bittorrent client.
It's a nice idea and they have some nice content.
Also wondered if I stood a chance of getting it to work on my Thinkpad T20 running last version of Redhat (9.0)? Would getting the tarball and building it on the machine work any better than stepping into rpm hell with the binary?
Redhat 9 is way too old.
-
Dale Beams -
Jason D. Clinton -
Jonathan Hutchins -
Josh Charles -
lowell