Sick of Gentoo

opopanax · Apprentice Joined: 30 Aug 2004 Posts: 244

Linux is Linux, and Open Source is Open Source. Someone up there had it right, man. How much beta software are you using on an OSX system, or with WinXP? From what I've seen in posts here, Windows 64-bit is FAR behind Gentoo 64-bit for hardware support, drivers, and applications which actually USE the 64-bit register. Why? because it's all BINARY, precompiled--another reason things might seem to "just work." Don't get me wrong, I've had my frustrations, too--I've cursed at my box, I've sworn I'd give it up--if I couldn't get it fixed in the next 14 straight hours of hacking away at config files or surfing google... :-)

But I've found, once things are fixed, they're FIXED, maybe forever, maybe until the next major version upgrade of a critical package. But I'm not alone when I'm looking for answers--I have this forum, the wiki, and the benefit of millions of hours of FREE LABOR AND DOCUMENTATION that come with this beast.

Linux/OSS ain't perfect, and it ain't for everyone. But it's for me. If it ain't for you, please don't try to dissuade others from staying. [brownnose]It benefits no one, and diminishes the effort of the devs who spend so much time making Gentoo what it is.[/brownnose] Using Gentoo is like trying to land a plane--If you do the work, do the research, study, and get help from folks that have the benefit of experience, you'll make it look easy and graceful. We want you here. But if you don't want to be, you're not exactly being held at gunpoint.

Morbo · n00b Joined: 08 Jan 2005 Posts: 19

sulu · Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:35 am Post subject:

In principle i fully agree with blk_jack but, as several other posters had pointed out, the title of the posting is very much misleading.
It should be renamed to

Archangel1 · Veteran Joined: 21 Apr 2004 Posts: 1212 Location: Work

loki99 · Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 10:35 am Post subject: Re: Sick of Gentoo

slonocode · Apprentice Joined: 03 Jun 2002 Posts: 273

Archangel1 · Veteran Joined: 21 Apr 2004 Posts: 1212 Location: Work

neylitalo · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 29 Jan 2006 Posts: 81

I can definitely see where you're coming from, blk_jack, but I have a few points to make, if I may.

To give what I think is the answer to your question about "why doesn't it just work easier": You have to really sit and realize that the people making it "work easier" are people just like you. They have jobs, they go to work, and then they come home, fire up gVim and see what they can do to improve x software. In rare cases, they'll wake up, roll over to the computer, and start plugging away, only to be interrupted by their mother's pleas to take a shower or eat lunch. : )

However, the people developing the ones that "just work" have a different story. They are professional developers. They go to work, and that's their job, to develop the ones that just work. They get paid to make the users happy, so they care quite a bit more about the ease-of-use and the prettiness of the app. And there is nothing keeping you from using the software that just works. However, you have to remember that there's a price involved - you're paying $200 for the ease-of-use and universality of Windows. You're paying $150 for the pretty skins and fancy icons in Mac OS X. And you're paying... what? $400? for Adobe Photoshop, when you can get The GIMP for free?

I, for one, would rather not have to pay the hundreds of dollars just to keep my software up to date, and have to put a few extra hours into getting my computer running the way I want it. And, after a bit of typing, some head-scratching, and a lot of mental cursing, it does - it works beautifully. I even go so far as to say it works better than Windows. Mac OS, I can't say much about - I've never been a Mac person. But I sure do appreciate the price tag that comes with Linux.

Summary: The open source developers don't have the same motivation (the paycheck) as the "pros" - so they may very well put less time and effort into developing a product that works the first time around.

Seige36 · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 03 Dec 2005 Posts: 105

lol ive been workin with alsa for weeks now and gotten nowhere this is when windows is nice...

Shadow Skill · Veteran Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 1023

I feel your pain man I really do. I feel like crying every time I have to crack open a CLI to do something on my box because of the plain jacked up way Linux is put together currently. I truly hate this insanity of multiple control interfaces for the operating system and would love to see a true equivalent to the Microsoft Management Console come into existence. It's something I want to try my hand at making a reality it's gotten me pretty fired up about programming and I spend quite a bit of time trying to teach myself enough Ruby so I can begin work on this set of tools. Its really a joke how users have to cobble together a working system with Linux and no truly generic tools exist short of memorizing a shitload of CLI commands.

When I look at Kernel building operations I cannot help but wonder why the hell the rest of the system isn't like that across the board with one general way of configuring the kernel without pretending that [insert text editor here] is a control interface. Not everyone uses gnome or KDE or Fluxbox so why is there not a general configuration menu that people can access via the CLI or X? [Just like the kernel configuration tool.] Like you I ask myself why there must be all this hassle in just controlling the box itself.

The problems get worse when you even THINK about dealing with certain types of programs particularly multimedia applications where getting things to behave requires a bunch of googling and asking in irc channels. [I'm actually trying freebsd on my laptop presently since I am intrigued by the *nix that gave rise to Portage.] and in some cases outright prayer on my part.] I have given up on lots of things I wanted to do with *nix simply because there was just no good documentation on how to get a specific thing done. I remember trying to get a specific button on my mouse to function a certain way and ending up with screwed up sound for around 16 hours when I didn't even touch anything in the Kernel related to sound while trying to make my mouse work.

I wonder sometimes if developers really think that people have nothing better to do than sit around hacking config files in a text editor because they [the developer] just forgot to put a control interface into thier program. I also wonder if they actually think about administrators it seems this is not likely because half finished or downright nonexistant control interfaces make an administrator's job alot more tedious than it has to be on top of dealing with not so knowledgeable users and other pressures from higher-ups. [This goes back to the lack of an MMC like tool.]

While my setup has pretty much settled I still find myself thinking about the issues that you have brought up as I try to make my own programs [mainly for my own use.] and I also still do find myself in these sorts of situations albeit not as often as when I first started using Linux, now it seems to be a matter of waiting for certain applications to stop sucking [all of them are multimedia applications.] which I guess is better than having to google for hours and ask in irc channels.
_________________
Ware wa mutekinari.
Wa ga kage waza ni kanau mono nashi.
Wa ga ichigeki wa mutekinari.

"First there was nothing, so the lord gave us light. There was still nothing, but at least you could see it."

aidanjt · Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:58 am Post subject:

The reason why there's no uniformed and consistant config tools for Linux is because all the distros put their systems together differently.. YaST on SuSE is the best GUI config tool I've ever used, but even it had its limitations.. and once you use a source package outside of the package tree there goes your config tool.. So unless all the projects and distros sit together and come up with a brilliant universal config file system (which isn't likely to happen), we're pretty much screwed.

Shadow Skill · Veteran Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 1023

I know what you are saying but there has to be some way to bridge things even with the pandemonium of so many different distros existing at the same time. Personally I think the only way one can have any chance of pulling this off is to build the tool around plugins so that the tool is more like a frame around which various plugins congregate that way one is able to create distro specific plugins while still maintaing consistency within the tool thereby avoiding breakge one one distro where as you end up with "all green" on another distro.
_________________
Ware wa mutekinari.
Wa ga kage waza ni kanau mono nashi.
Wa ga ichigeki wa mutekinari.

"First there was nothing, so the lord gave us light. There was still nothing, but at least you could see it."

aidanjt · Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:31 am Post subject:

yea, thats kinda how YaST was built.. unfortunatly we need the distros to work together, but there's too much rivalry/pride for us to realise that goal.

humbletech99 · Veteran Joined: 26 May 2005 Posts: 1229 Location: London

Unix was never designed to be easy, it's original name was programmer's work bench and since linux is a clone of unix, it stands to reason it won't be easy either unless there is a huge load of effort on this front. If you want ease of use, buy a Mac - Unix with a nice gui and lots a graphical configuration because Apple have put in tonnes of work to get it to that point - money motivates it would seem...

And speaking of Yast etc... I'd just like to say that I tend to hate distro specific tools. I avoid them and prefer to hack files because that way, when I log in to another distro, I'm not totally lost...

We need the mother of all Linux configuration tools to be sooooo good that every distro ships it, only then will we make progress. By for the forseeable future, Linux will remain a niche and techie's OS. I have no problem with that. I have heard people complaining in forums and irc about all the gentoobies that seem to be coming over. I can understand that. If it becomes easier, it will detract from the skills and understanding it gives you to learn the ins and outs...

Personally, I'm not bothered about having to read documentation as long as it works reliably and has good features. Also, gentoo's docs rule supreme. Clear, concise and colourful!
_________________
The Human Equation:

value(geeks) > value(mundanes)

Shadow Skill · Veteran Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 1023

Right so operating systems were created for the enjoyment of computer scientists, please go read a history book before you say things like that again. These things have always been built with a consumer in mind period its really annoying to hear people with absolutely no knowledge of history spout a bunch of crap about how *nix is for techies etc etc and of course techies just love to memorize ten thousand commands and use the most inefficient means possible to get things done right the first time. Unix was designed for use by the millitary and for general use on mainframes and such as would be available to large companies over thirty years ago it was even designed before the mouse was truly perfected [the first mouse was created in 1963 Unix development started around the same time but didn't get its name until the seventies around the same time the original inventor of the mouse got his patent.] so it would stand to reason that the Unix interface would take time to adapt to the use of the mouse since the mouse would first have to become somewhat popular. Its been thirty years give or take and yet there are still people who want to remain in the 70's for no good reason, save that using the most inefficient means possible to do something makes doing the task that much cooler....

If I have to administer tens and in some cases even hundreds of boxes and deal with people in the company, and deal [indirectly] with the companies customers, and deal with the occassional hardware failure I do not want to spend an hour or two scripting together a log parser because some people think typing cat | grep foo is the only way to go [These of course are the people that only have maybe two or three boxes to deal with at any given time.] then of course the current reality is that there are alot of people who function as both the user and administrator who do not have any formal training or internships to pick up coding/networking skills who would also benefit from true system administration powertools because such tools would provide more efficient ways of handling things than just using each tool seperately, or cobbling various tools together through the use of wrapper scripts they must code themselves.

I have used a mac before and they are truly not that great at all your best bet is to try and run some *nix gui on top of it to get anything useful out of it since the interface is for the most part utter crap. Lets not forget how they over price the mediocre hardware that they put out into the market a Mac is really not a solution. The fact of the matter is that the market for *nix is and has to expand into the desktop market so real effort has to be put into making things more efficient for the end user, constantly writing scripts or cobbling together control interfaces is not very efficient at all. Relying on thirty year old UI design is not going to cut it either. The way *nix really works now was probably a hell of alot easier than the way the computers of the forties and fifties worked but its not very efficient in the modern world given the advances in technology and newer less painful methods of doing things.
_________________
Ware wa mutekinari.
Wa ga kage waza ni kanau mono nashi.
Wa ga ichigeki wa mutekinari.

"First there was nothing, so the lord gave us light. There was still nothing, but at least you could see it."

humbletech99 · Veteran Joined: 26 May 2005 Posts: 1229 Location: London

Well Mr. Authoritative, it may pain you to know that the original name for UNIX was PWB (Programmer's Work Bench) - Give you some clue as to the original intention?

Your argument about taking time to adapt is really stupid since the WIndows has been around less time and conqueunixred the mouse many years ago resulting in it taking overwhelming majority of the world's desktops... (let's have no IBM OS/2 in here please - we're comparing it against linux/unix...). It's a bit weak to say that after 35 years, unix's various incantantations still need time to get used to the existence of a mouse. Apple and Windows have done it in less time, so why hasn't linux/unix in general. Simple, not that many developers and sysadmins are that bothered outside the commercial circles, those inside commercial circles are simply looking for the pay off.

I administer at around 30+ linux servers among other things (single handed as well) and find the unix toolchains a godsend. In fact, it's cited by experienced unix admins as being one of the beauties of unix and I agree. Once you get it, you're inside the system. Also, most servers don't have superfluous graphical interfaces in the unix world. You need to get a grip on things before you go telling the whole world they are wrong. Especially when a huge number of those people are more intelligent and skilled than yourself. Is it not more likely that you're wrong?

Macs are overpriced with mediocre hardware, but then what do you expect from a brand? You can't have it every which way. Some people are just never satisfied or grateful for the work other have done for them.

Bottom line: If you want simple, stick to WINDOWS. That's what it's there for...
_________________
The Human Equation:

value(geeks) > value(mundanes)

Shadow Skill · Veteran Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 1023

Right oh yes efficiency means using commandline tools uhh sure ok commiting 11million commands is alot more efficient than using a tool with simillar functionality to the MMC which allows one to create a comepletly custom control panel of sorts that also can be used for certain remote administration options and view various statistics in graphical form such as line graphs and even pie charts I believe. There is a difference between saying something is good because you have actually seen what the competition has done and you can genuinely say this way is good and saying something is good because you have never actually seen how something has been done in a much better way. You do understand that the project that gave birth to Unix cost money yet you are trying to imply that Unix was created as a toy to be used by computer scientists which of course makes no logical sense since this would basically mean that as far as bell labs was concerned the project would have no real purpose at all. You most certainly can make what amounts to a toy with your own money but in order for it to go anywhere it has to be funded by someone unless of course you are incredibly rich an can afford to fund the whole damned thing yourself. I also wonder if there is any logical reason to undertake such a task the only thing I can think of is that a tailored system would make it easier to develop various other tools for other systems other than that there would really be no purpose to such a thing.

PWB is actually a fork of the original Unix which is a descendant of Multics see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PWB/UNIX
If you think about this for about ten seconds you realize that making it easier to develop software means that one is able to produce products quicker for other uses. When one is able to perform various research related tasks more efficiently one is able to come to understanding more quickly which in many cases enables one to apply the knowledge gained to something else. In other words these things were never built simply for the sake of building them, which means that there had to be a consumer for what ever was produced by these projects in order for these projects to have any true meaning outside of mere theory.
_________________
Ware wa mutekinari.
Wa ga kage waza ni kanau mono nashi.
Wa ga ichigeki wa mutekinari.

"First there was nothing, so the lord gave us light. There was still nothing, but at least you could see it."

Gergan Penkov · Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 2:07 am Post subject:

Well it seems that there are some such threads in recent times

while the possibility of configure throgh clicks is a great thing, I find it a nigthmare in terms of reliability
have you ever experienced a major registry fck on windows?
have you seen worms at work autostarted, installed together with the XP-installation, because of the open ports.
do you know how much resources hog norton and that it is practically impossible to deinstall it because of its registry entries?
now what seems hard in linux is really blessing, after one time configuration and without special precautions it just keeps running - I don't need to reinstall, reconfigure re....
the updates are just here - use your tool (be it portage, apt-get, yast or you name it)
I don't have to look around if OO has a new version or the kernel is updated or libc
now I don't think it is that hard to read pair of articles in gentoo-wiki or ask a question here in the forums and configure your system - after that most of it will work forever.
And I don't see why cli is so bad - you could read Neal Stephenson's "In The Beginning Was The Command Line" for some really refreshing thoughts

_________________
"I knew when an angel whispered into my ear,
You gotta get him away, yeah
Hey little bitch!
Be glad you finally walked away or you may have not lived another day."
Godsmack

Shadow Skill · Veteran Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 1023

First off cli in and of itself is not bad having to commit so many commands and command combinations to memory however is not really a good thing when there is a such thing as Ncurses or curses which allows one to create "graphical" programs that could be used to group various sets of commands into one place or provide a different way of displaying data which would normally require a very long implicit script or the user typing in a bunch of seperate commands to achieve a desired effect. If *nix had a cli equivalent of the MMC using the system would be far simpler than it is now and far more efficient than in some cases having to guess at the appropriate command to perform a given task or dive into the ridiculously badly written man pages [Pinfo is a godsend I swear at least browsing man pages is alot less annoying with that thing.] and hope you find an answer that makes sense.

Then there is of course all the googling/irc/forum searching depending on what you are trying to accomplish. I would love to see the efficiency of Kernel compilation spread to the rest of the operating system it also happens that the curses dialogs for configuring the kernel are a far more efficient way of dealing with Kernel options since it presents them in a logical manner and in most cases provides a bit of information about the option and its effects. Of course if I happened to know the exact name of a given kernel option I could go ahead and hack the file directly with any text editor I wanted but I would already have to know what I was looking for and its desired effect before this would become a reality.

Efficiency is not about whether or not a tool is CLI or not what matters is how the things are presented and how quickly one can accomplish a task without nessecarily having prior knowledge of the given commands. CLI requires that you already know exactly what to do before you do it otherwise you will just end up lost and even if you happen to know what to do some tasks are just better done with a visual mnuemonic [File management that involves more than a copy/mv operation into one or two directory levels.] If I tried to do some of the mv/copy operations I do quite often from the CLI I would most likely end up with a very, very, very, very long and complicated script that would take me quite a bit of time to write not to mention debug. Where as I could have used mc or Krusader and save a great deal of time typing and testing and debuging.
_________________
Ware wa mutekinari.
Wa ga kage waza ni kanau mono nashi.
Wa ga ichigeki wa mutekinari.

"First there was nothing, so the lord gave us light. There was still nothing, but at least you could see it."

slonocode · Apprentice Joined: 03 Jun 2002 Posts: 273

humbletech99 · Veteran Joined: 26 May 2005 Posts: 1229 Location: London

All this talk of MMCs, it may shock you to know that I am also an infrastructure architect in Active Directory and although I do think MMCs are quite good you have to understand that Linux/Unix and Windows are so completely different that you can't compare them in such a way.

Windows has very poor command line tools by comparison to Unix based systems because it was designed to work in a different way (which is why they added WSH), just as Unix based systems have very poor graphical tools because they weren't originally intended for it. Adding something in as an afterthought is a lot more difficult than designing it to be that way from the beginning.

Windows is better at some things, and Linux is better at others. That's why both exist, you shouldn't try to make one the other, just use the one you prefer and leave the other alone.
_________________
The Human Equation:

value(geeks) > value(mundanes)