Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Mon 11th Jan 2010 15:57 UTC
Original OSNews Interviews A few weeks ago, we asked for the OSNews community to help with some questions we were going to ask Aaron Griffin from the Arch Linux team, and the response was glorious and somewhat phenomenal. We added those questions to our own and sent them on over, and then we were surprised by receiving not only Aaron Griffin's responses but answers from various individuals from the team.
Thread beginning with comment 403750
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Ugh
by nt_jerkface on Tue 12th Jan 2010 19:56 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ugh"
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

Arch linux isn't really just a general purpose linux. It's base install is very compact and runs pretty well as an embedded system.

I could say the same thing about Slackware.


Shared libraries allow different people in different locations to develop the software.

The shared library system isn't needed to allow that.

Many of us don't even consider large gigabyte drives useable and only use little flash drives for the system.

Oh give me a break, even 8 gig flash drives are cheap these days which is plenty of space.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Ugh
by Laurence on Tue 12th Jan 2010 20:45 in reply to "RE[4]: Ugh"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

"Arch linux isn't really just a general purpose linux. It's base install is very compact and runs pretty well as an embedded system.

I could say the same thing about Slackware.
"
And a good number of Arch users are ex-Slackware users.

However there are also a number of key differences between Slack and Arch (which is why some people like myself switched).

Edited 2010-01-12 20:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Ugh
by mesomaan on Tue 12th Jan 2010 21:07 in reply to "RE[4]: Ugh"
mesomaan Member since:
2006-01-04


"
Shared libraries allow different people in different locations to develop the software.

The shared library system isn't needed to allow that.

No but sharing is required for that, and shared libraries is a very good approach to sharing. Do you prefer a bunch of big static linked apps?


Many of us don't even consider large gigabyte drives useable and only use little flash drives for the system.

Oh give me a break, even 8 gig flash drives are cheap these days which is plenty of space.
"

When was thew last time you tried running Win7 or Vista on 8GB? Not really sure about that for MacOS, but there really aren't any embedded mac's aside from ipods and iphones

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Ugh
by nt_jerkface on Wed 13th Jan 2010 04:27 in reply to "RE[5]: Ugh"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

When was thew last time you tried running Win7 or Vista on 8GB? Not really sure about that for MacOS, but there really aren't any embedded mac's aside from ipods and iphones


That's an irrelevant question. The fact that you can install Linux on an 8GB drive is not due to the shared library system. It comes from being able to strip the system down to the components that you want.

You can also install PC-BSD on an 8GB drive and use the pbi system which doesn't use shared libraries.

Reply Parent Score: 2