В Mon, 23 Feb 2015 14:05:49 +0000
KatolaZ <katolaz@???> пишет:

> If it is true that "freedom of choice" sounds like a cool flagship, on
> the other hand we effectively have no freedom at all about the choice
> of the large majority of the core components of a GNU/Linux system,
> starting with the libc and continuing with the authentication system
> (pam), most of the basic libraries, system tools and so forth. And if
> you want a GUI, you don't have any alternative to X-servers and
> X-clients (I know, wayland promises to change this, but not for the
> better IMHO). And if you are not content of juxt X + twm and you want
> a working GUI + a DM, you are bound to install tons of dependencies,
> for most of which there are no replacements at all. In most of the
> cases, 99.5% of the user don't even know exactly what is installed in
> their hard disks, and they don't care, as long as it *works*.

UNIXes have to divide its software by function types and not the
suites, depending on each other and the only. For example, it should be
possible for X user to pick his/her own X environment: task bar from
one package, window maanger from another, screen-saver from the third,
etc. -- according to personal prefernces on how well each particular
software does its job, or how much comfortable to use it for the end
user.

And os it is w/ all the OS - does not matter what. -- So, all the
software should work w/ each other - through APIs that should be
standartized. And that's it.

And the Enemy disaster, the "SystemD" will not be problem - for the
sold/betraial DDs will be to have use the disaster, and the yet free
distro-s -- "SysV". -- And so on.

Sthu.