Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th Feb 2010 19:06 UTC, submitted by diegocg
KDE And there we are, the KDE team has released KDE Software Compilation 4.4, formerly known as, well, KDE. Major new features include social networking and online collaboration integration, the new netbook interface, the KAuth authentication framework, and a lot more.
Thread beginning with comment 408729
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
boldingd
Member since:
2009-02-19

"If you're trying to install things from source, sure. But if you stick to your distributor's repositories, you'll probably be fine.


Probably isn't good enough and users shouldn't have to wait for a repository update just to run the latest version of a browser. It's also a complete waste of labor hunting down dependency bugs.
"

Frankly, "probably" is all you really get in software. Probably's all you get in Windows or OS X, where any given third-party installation may or may not work. True, the odds of failure are pretty low, usually, but then again, the odds of a modern package management system failing are also pretty low. (I've yet to see it happen - at least, out of Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian, and Sidux. I have imploded Gentoo quite dramatically... but then, that's Gentoo.)

I'm OK with waiting for my distributor to package an upgrade - certainly if I'm using a distribution that does so in a reasonable amount of time. Fedora and Ubuntu give you a decently new version of most packages.

Frankly, if you consider a lag while you wait for the distributor to package software a cost of having a centralized installation/update point, then I still think a repository system is worth it -- even with that minus, I still think it's more pluses than minuses.

And, anyway, you can just get your dependancies from the package management infrastructure, and build from source, if you're that impatient.

Reply Parent Score: 4

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


Frankly, "probably" is all you really get in software. Probably's all you get in Windows or OS X, where any given third-party installation may or may not work. True, the odds of failure are pretty low, usually, but then again, the odds of a modern package management system failing are also pretty low.


Odds of a user having dependency issues than problems with an exe are much higher.


Frankly, if you consider a lag while you wait for the distributor to package software a cost of having a centralized installation/update point, then I still think a repository system is worth it -- even with that minus, I still think it's more pluses than minuses.


The repository system is lousy for proprietary software and the latest versions of open source. It's also quite messy from a software engineering POV. You could have a repository without the shared libraries. A repository of independent programs would be much cleaner and would increase stability.


And, anyway, you can just get your dependancies from the package management infrastructure, and build from source, if you're that impatient.

Yes I'm quite aware of that but it's unrealistic to expect users to compile software, ever. All they hear is "do all this ugly crap to upgrade" when in Windows/OSX it is just a couple clicks .

Reply Parent Score: 2

boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

"
Frankly, "probably" is all you really get in software. Probably's all you get in Windows or OS X, where any given third-party installation may or may not work. True, the odds of failure are pretty low, usually, but then again, the odds of a modern package management system failing are also pretty low.


Odds of a user having dependency issues than problems with an exe are much higher.
"

I meant an installation or updating failure in general, not a dependancy resolution issue in specific. I don't have installs fail often on Windows -- but it definitely does happen. And I don't have installations from Apt or Yum fail often either. I'm not sure one is significantly more reliable than the other: they are both sufficiently reliable.

"Frankly, if you consider a lag while you wait for the distributor to package software a cost of having a centralized installation/update point, then I still think a repository system is worth it -- even with that minus, I still think it's more pluses than minuses.


The repository system is lousy for proprietary software and the latest versions of open source. It's also quite messy from a software engineering POV. You could have a repository without the shared libraries. A repository of independent programs would be much cleaner and would increase stability.
"

Being lousy for proprietary software distribution... is not really a disadvantage, from my perspective. I suffer no ill effects for it, as a user, anyway.

And having a centralized repository system and distributing huge, statically-linked binaries... would be hugely inefficient. It'd certainly waste bandwidth and disk-space, at least. Not to mention that every time some common dependancy library changed, then every single large, statically-linked package would have to be re-built and re-distributed - so it'd be a recurring waste of bandwidth and distributor time. It makes much more sense, if you already have a centralized software distribution and update channel, to use a shared library system.

"
And, anyway, you can just get your dependancies from the package management infrastructure, and build from source, if you're that impatient.

Yes I'm quite aware of that but it's unrealistic to expect users to compile software, ever. All they hear is "do all this ugly crap to upgrade" when in Windows/OSX it is just a couple clicks .
"

Not general users: you. I don't think "general desktop users" have any business always and immediately jumping to the very latest release, in most cases. (Most distributors, I think will push an update out quickly in cases where appropriate -- say, major security flaws). If you want the latest version now, you want it so bad that you can't wait for the upstream distributor to package it, and you consider yourself to be critically deprived if you don't get it na0, then you probably want it bad enough to go through an extra step or two. And, if you only do this for a handful of packages, the results will actually work out pretty well.

Reply Parent Score: 4