Re: [tlug] State of "Linux" documentation [C&C]

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>]

Jonathan Byrne writes:

 > In my view, those are all different operating systems that share a common
 > kernel (more or less; good luck with dropping a Red Hat kernel into a
 > Debian system) and userland (more or less), that run - for the most part
 > - common windowing environments or full desktop environments.

They also share the whole gamut of APIs, the build chain (as you
acknowledge below), most applications are the same (typically the
differences are the skins configured by default), etc.

I think it's defeatist to call those different operating systems, just
as it's outright silly to say that a Hummer and a Toyota Yaris are
"different transportation systems".  I think it is indeed sad that (up
to the income and preferences of the driver) the Hummer and the Yaris
are both "cars" sharing the same UI, but we're lightyears away from
being able to say the same thing about open source OSes, which share
far more parts than the cars do, but somehow manage to totally miss
the point of that commonality.

What really is different is that each (GNU-based) distro has its own
form of PMS.  They all have the same result though: more or less once
a month they cause the user to get real cranky and refuse to come to
bed when called.

 > If you have Red Hat, buy a Red Hat book. If you have Ubuntu, buy an
 > Ubuntu book.

That's reasonable.  It would be nice to get some advice as to which
one.  In my experience everything since Matt Welch's book has been
junk.

 > Nobody's wringing their hands or the fact that a book on Solaris
 > might not be all that useful to a person using HPUX.

Since when have they stopped distributing manuals as part of the
package, though?  You buy Solaris, you get a pretty good book.