Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 8th Nov 2012 20:54 UTC, submitted by Elv13
Gnome "Theme development is a tedious and difficult task, and for the GTK devs to be so careless in breaking their API at every turn disrespects the many hours people put into making themes for it. [...] I was given to believe that this breakage stems from a Microsoft-like climate of preventing users from customizing their systems, and deliberately breaking the work of others so that your 'brand' is the best. Anytime I hear the word 'brand' being used in Linux, I know something valuable is being poisoned." I find the tone of this one a bit too harsh and overly negative at times, but his point still stands.
Thread beginning with comment 541820
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

No he didn't misunderstand that, you guys keep on misunderstanding the fact it is about the attitude ... the specifics are not important.

No, it wasn't about attitude at all. Miguel specifically talked about the Linux kernel breaking APIs without the slightest idea as to what actually gets broken around the kernel. What doesn't get broken are the external userspace interfaces, and Linux desktops have done that time and time and time and time again.

Oh goody ... well people are still breaking after updates.

Speak to your distributor. I fail to see how Linus is responsible or the updates they put together, but this kind of logic appears to be common. The point still stands that the kernels userspace interface have remained totally stable.

Reply Parent Score: 3

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

No, it wasn't about attitude at all. Miguel specifically talked about the Linux kernel breaking APIs without the slightest idea as to what actually gets broken around the kernel. What doesn't get broken are the external userspace interfaces, and Linux desktops have done that time and time and time and time again.


Yes it was. You are having a reading comprehension failure.

Reply Parent Score: 2

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

No, and it looks as if I'm going to have to point this out otherwise we'll be in Punch and Judy territory:

Linus, despite being a low-level kernel guy, set the tone for our community years ago when he dismissed binary compatibility for device drivers. The kernel people might have some valid reasons for it, and might have forced the industry to play by their rules, but the Desktop people did not have the power that the kernel people did.

Linus pointed out that he was completely, totally and utterly wrong about this because the kernel has never changed any interfaces for anything outside the kernel - i.e. userspace. People switched from Linux 2.4 to 2.6 without any problems whatsoever. People upgrade their kernels all the time without userspace stuff breaking.

He's completely misunderstanding what drivers are actually a part of and what he's actually talking about and trying to blame the internals of the kernel for the mess of the Linux desktop that he perpetuated.

The problem with Linux desktops is that they change their external interfaces every five minutes. Even when things are API and ABI compatible, expected behaviour changes. It's just funny that even now, after all this time, he just doesn't understand what the problems actually are and is trying to palm them off on something and someone else.

Reply Parent Score: 3