Firefox 2 on Dapper

Tue Jan 16 19:27:59 UTC 2007

On Tuesday 16 January 2007 13:02, Donn wrote:
> > You have it backwards.  It isn't an issue of libBlah supporting older
> > calls, it is a matter of package newappversion requiring calls that are
> > found in libBlah-2, but not in the libBlah-1 that you have.
>
> So, it's really a result of the rapid change of Linux apps, this synching
> problem between libraries and apps?

It happens with Windows as well.  Search a windows computer for a common DLL 
and you'll find many copies of identical and different versions.  
Improvements mean new versions.

>
> > What should
> > work is that libBlah-2 should include the calls found in libBlah-1, and
> > oldapps, buiilt for libBlah-1, should accept libBlah-2 as satisfying a
> > dependency.
>
> My problem is that new apps won't run on old distro's... you have explained
> that's because the new apps have new demands. Right?

Right.

>
> > What often happens with Kubuntu upgrades, though, is that libBlah gets
> > renamed to something like libcoreBlah and the newappversion doesn't see
> > libBlah as a version of libcoreBlah. Among the things that backporters do
> > is make changes to newappversion-backport so that it recognizes these
> > things.
>
> Oh, so they have to mess with the source code and re-compile things to meet
> older library supplies.

Sometimes.  Other times it is just adjusting the dependency needs stored in a 
deb so that apt knows that x need is also satisfied by y lib.

>
> > Another problem is that entire subsystems may change with new app
> > versions. For instance amarok 1.4 just couldn't be made to run on the kde
> > version that came with breezy because it had changed so fundamentally.
>
> Wow.
>
> Alright. I get the overall impression of a wild, crazy, tazmanian devil
> ball of whirling software shooting across space. The change is rapid and
> unpredictable and it's amazing what the distros do to produce
> working "snapshots" of this mayhem every now and then.
>
> What is the reason for the seeming stability (i.e. backwards support) of
> Windows then?

It is a different programming philosophy.  You may wish to read the 
introduction to Eric S. Raymond's book, The Art of Unix Programming".  (maybe 
the "zen" of Unix programming, I lent my copy and never got it back. (It may 
be on that ebooks site that was mentioned here a week or so ago.)

MS committed to backward compatibility with most of Windows.  Some say that is 
why it is so cumbersome compared to Linux (Look at the size of a Linux vs. 
Windows package that serves a similar need.)

Lets take k3b and Nero as an example.  Nero is huge in part because it is self 
contained.  I think it is somewhere between 40 and 60 MB.  k3b is mere 
kilobytes.  That is because it relies on cdrecord, cdrao, mkisofs, growisofs, 
etc.  In turn other Linux cdrom GUIs can also use cdrecord, cdrao, mkisofs, 
growisofs, etc., while providing a different interface.

Whenever possible, Linux programs strive to separate the interface from the 
engine, allowing other developers to provide alternative interfaces.  
Likewise, a gui can use alternative engines.  This is a good open source 
model because it allows expansion of a program and reuse of good code in a 
new environment.

Windows, OTOH, tends to distribute proprietary programs in self contained 
packages.  Everything you need to run the program, other than the OS comes in 
setup.exe.  This makes it easy to install a program and get it to work, but 
results in many copies and versions of some common components, results in 
bloat and may result in conflicts.  I agree that problems with such conflicts 
have decreased with w2k, but the programming philosophy is the same.  This 
model is the result of closed source.  A program needs to be fully self 
contained because available components are closed and inaccessible to other 
programs.

In windows you don't have someone maintaining cdrecord.exe so that Nero or 
Roxio or whatever can use it and concentrate on the GUI instead.  Even if you 
did, Nero would distribute its own version of cdrecord.exe.  In Linux where 
programs like cdrecord are open and used by other programs, you sometimes run 
into a problem that a gui like k3b version 3.x requires cdrecord 4.y or 
higher for its features.  If your distro provides cdrecord 3.y, then you 
can't upgrade k3b to 3.x.

> I have read recently (can't find link) about how hard Microsoft has to work
> to keep backwards compat going. Apparently they even hardcoded special
> cases into their kernel to run games like Sim City (or The Sims, I forget).
> So the answer to my question could be exactly this: Microsoft has made it a
> mission to keep compatibility, but Linux being mostly unpaid and chaotic
> has no such luxury.

Linux doesn't have much problem with backward compatibility; the problem is 
with "forward compatibility".  And it isn't MS so much as windows software 
distributors who are responsible for the forward compatibility.  If they need 
something new to make their program work, they include it if they can.

If you don't think Windows has the same problem at least in part, try 
installing iTunes in windows 98.  Can't do it because it relies too much on 
Windows 2000 or greater DRM management.  Same with TurboTax.

>
> Still, seen from the pov of Windows, is it unnatural to want to move to
> newer version of software you need and use but *not* want to have to face
> an entire O/S upgrade (with hellish complexity) every time? It seems like a
> real problem, a catch-22. I know it causes me stress and I'm a 100% Linux
> user. I had another friend who tried Ubuntu for a while but got so
> irritated that she could not go to new versions (of FF and Thunderbird)
> that she gave up.

As I said, this is true of windows, albeit to a lesser degree, also.

-- 

_____________________________________________________________
Art Alexion

PGP fingerprint: 52A4 B10C AA73 096F A661  92D2 3B65 8EAC ACC5 BA7A
Keyserver: hkp://subkeys.pgp.net
The attachment - signature.asc - is my electronic signature; no need for 
alarm.  Info @ 
http://mysite.verizon.net/art.alexion/encryption/signature.asc.what.html
_____________________________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 309 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-users/attachments/20070116/67b602b6/attachment.sig>