Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 15th Feb 2007 14:59 UTC, submitted by lucasvr
Linux "GoboLinux is a unique distribution in many ways. It's built from scratch following the Linux From Scratch procedure and uses custom boot scripts, personalized directory structure, and a simple yet comprehensive source-based dependency-resolving package management system. GoboLinux is perhaps best known for its alternate filesystem hierarchy. Unlike Linux's traditional Filesystem hierarchy, where a program has bits and pieces scattered in several places like /etc, /usr/bin, and /usr/share, each program gets its own directory tree under GoboLinux."
Thread beginning with comment 213087
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: GoboLinux is great, but...
by Tom5 on Thu 15th Feb 2007 18:15 UTC in reply to "GoboLinux is great, but..."
Tom5
Member since:
2005-09-17

So I think what projects like AutoPackage and ZeroInstall really need if they want to take off is to start their own distros

I think both projects would count that as a failure. The aim is to be cross-distro, not create another one! We should be able to get packages that install to whatever the underlying system is. It's just good architecture.

I'd certainly like to see more interop between Gobo and Zero Install (time is just limited). Presumably you could use a Zero Install feed in place of a Gobo recipe without too much trouble.

Don't know if it would work the other way; do Gobo binaries contain hard-coded paths (like "/Program/Joe/3.1/")?

Reply Parent Score: 1

Moochman Member since:
2005-07-06

As I said in my above comment, there's no reason cross-compatibility would need to be thrown out just because an AutoPackage- or Zero Install-specific distro exists. I think the combination of distro support and cross-platform capabilities would be the perfect one-two punch.

...come to think of it, Debian's apt has had success with exactly that model...

Also, about Zero Install integration into GoboLinux: it would probably be doable, but would require serious reworking of the GoboLinux folder hierarchy to the point where it wouldn't really be GoboLinux anymore. Zero Install installs shared libraries in separate folders from the programs that use them, so that the minimum amount of redundancy is necessary (of course, multiple versions of libraries are still possible, and are automatically assigned to whatever programs need them). Also, Zero Install uses a funky hash-based folder naming scheme which is quite different from GoboLinux's straightforward name-based approach.

If you haven't already, check out the article on Zero Install that was posted a month ago:

http://www.osnews.com/story.php/16956/Decentralised-Installation-Sy...

Edited 2007-02-15 21:03

Reply Parent Score: 2

Tom5 Member since:
2005-09-17

You can use the Zero Install feed format without any of the funky hash stuff if you want. It just lists versions, where to get them, what they depend on, etc.

Here's an example of a program with several available versions, all of which require the ROX-Lib library (View Source to see the XML):

http://0install.net/2007/interfaces/0publish-gui.xml

Reply Parent Score: 2

hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

iirc, there is someone playing around with having Zero Install play nice with gobo. dont know its present status...

Reply Parent Score: 2

hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

afaik, gobo binaries only contain hardcoded paths if the original source did so. as in, gobo tries to avoid having to modify the source. thats why the compile environment is a chroot, as it use the original "make install" stage to find out what files go where when creating the symlinks later on.

there is a ongoing debate on the mailinglist ever so often about allowing gentoo like compile stuff, but gets shot down because one wants to keep the binaries as generic as can be done.

thats also why the gobohide kernel addon is used to hide a symlinked legacy tree. there are some binaries that have hardcoded paths, and rather then try to sniff them out a legacy tree is created for them.

and why do the hiding kernel side rather then file browser side like apple does? are you aware of the number of file browsers available for use in a linux environment?

Reply Parent Score: 2

wannabe geek Member since:
2006-09-27

" and why do the hiding kernel side rather then file browser side like apple does? are you aware of the number of file browsers available for use in a linux environment?"

You answered your own question, that's exactly the reason ;)

In Gobolinux, thanks to GoboHide, you see the same filesystem regardless of the filebrowser or shell you are using.

Reply Parent Score: 1