Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] Ubuntu Forks Overview; Ubuntu Without Mono

Hash: SHA1

Attack Of The Ubuntu Forks

,----[ Quote ]
| Every time there is a new Linux distro that is making a lot of noise in the 
| Linux community, it is just waiting to be forked by someone. Most of these 
| forks are cosmetic in nature and are generally design improvements of user 
| interface and sometimes adding packages not installed by default or removing 
| few not used by many. Some go as far as bundling them with custom kernel or 
| using a different package manager. Ubuntu - being the most widely used Linux 
| distribution - is also not immune to the clone/forks attacks. Today, we will 
| look at some of the well-received Ubuntu based forks out there, which are not 
| supported by Canonical.        


How to remove Mono from Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid Ibex

,----[ Quote ]
| Fortunately, the dependency management tools mean that we don’t have to 
| remove each one of these files on it’s own. The single package mono-common is 
| a common dependency for everything above apart from libmono0.  
| So the command to purge yourself of all the Microsoft infected software is as 
| follows: 
| sudo apt-get remove --purge mono-common libmono0
| This command will remove almost 60MB of crap from your hard drive and free 
| you from eternal damnation and suffering. Well, OK. Perhaps it’s not quite 
| that bad, but I personally have no wish to use software that is so tainted. 
| Nor for that matter do I want to use code that is so tightly bound to a 
| company that, amongst other things, manages to screw us all out of 
| significant tax revenues     



Why Mono and Samba Are Patently Different

,----[ Quote ]
| Samba grew out of a classic hacker's itch. Its creator, Andrew Tridgell,
| wanted to connect his PC to a departmental Sun machine, and knocked up a bit
| of server code for the latter to make that possible. It was only later that
| he discovered – to his amazement – that his program also worked with PCs
| running Windows.
| This meant that Samba, running on GNU/Linux, could function as a file and
| printer server for Windows users, which was why it became one of the first
| free software programs to find its way into enterprises, since it was
| effectively a drop-in replacement for more expensive Windows-based solutions.
| In other words, Samba is a free implementation of some protocols used by
| Windows, and was created so that free code could be used instead of
| Microsoft's.
| Now consider Mono. Like Samba, it aims to reproduce functionality available
| on the Windows platform, so that people can use free software instead: a
| laudable goal in itself. But the end-result, which depends on Microsoft's
| work, is something that encourages developers to write *yet more* code that
| uses Microsoft's approach. In benighted countries where software can be
| patented, this means that any patents that Microsoft has in the .NET
| framework are like to apply to any code developed with Mono. Like an
| infectious disease, the intellectual monopoly is spread wider.
| [...]
| This is what makes Mono so dangerous: developers that use this framework are,
| in fact, helping to disperse the poison of Microsoft's intellectual
| monopolies across the free software ecosystem. I'm sure that's not the aim of
| the Mono developers, who doubtless have the best of intentions, but sadly it
| is the inevitable result. And that is why developers and users need to be
| warned off Mono in a way that is not necessary for Samba.



Miguel, Mono and Microsoft

,----[ Quote ]
| is Mono's role in the deal that of a hook to make customers write
| .NET applications because they can be run on Linux - only to find
| later on that they are armless or legless because of a change in
| the .NETspecifications, a change which Microsoft decides not to
| make public?
| [...]
| And here we have an individual who decides to replicate one of
| the proprietary company's development environments - for reasons
| best known to him alone - and keeps telling people that the reason
| he's doing it is so that he can pull people over from the
| proprietary company's side to his side!!!


Mono? Mono!

,----[ Quote ]
| Note the lack of good faith:
|  Nobody said that "GNOME depends on Mono"; rather, Mono is pushed into GNOME,
|  distros are installing Tomboy and F-Spot and Beagle by default, and users
|  are intoxicated to believe that they can't live without Mono!  
|  "GNOME depends on libbeagle, a Mono program": Sir, we knew that libbeagle is
|  a C library! But why is it there? (Do you need a hint?)
|  "NDesk-DBus is replacing DBus in GNOME": I'm afraid this will happen one
|  day!
|  "Someday soon it will be practically impossible to write any app for GNOME
|  without being forced to use MONO": Yes, this is going to be true! (Alas...)


Mono to be renamed as Duo

,----[ Quote ]
| Mr de Icaza told those assembled that he had always had a dual purpose in
| starting the project - to provide an implementation of Microsoft's .NET
| development framework so that Linux developers could enjoy the wonderful
| programming tools built in Redmond and also to ensure that in future Linux
| became so integrated with Microsoft that it would not be possible to pull the
| two apart.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index