A new definition of libraries (was: Linux Installation)

[Mark Smith]

Bob, I think you may be getting hung up on the face-value meaning of  
the word 'standalone'. As Jacque pointed out, there really is no such  
thing in the world of modern personal computers. Maybe it would be  
helpful to consider a rev-made 'standalone' as simply a stack that  
does not require  the IDE or a separate stackrunner app in order run.

> 2) A program which depends on "constant" libraries in the runtime  
> OS only.
>
> To these 2 types of program we need to add non-standalones:
> 3) A program which makes use of "variable" libraries in the runtime  
> OS.

>  Only time will tell whether Rev standalones really belong in one  
> category or another by this empirical method.

Which category a Rev standalone belongs in is a question of what it's  
been designed to do.
What libraries are needed depends entirely on what the stack does.  
This is not an exclusively Linux issue, and not a Rev issue, either.  
Many things that people do with Rev (and other development tools)  
depend on the presence of quicktime, for instance. While quicktime  
comes as standard on macs, it does not on windows machines. There  
have been many discussions on this list  of how best to deal with that.

There have also been many discussions on this list about the fact  
that many ISP/Hosting services fail to run Rev CGIs because they  
haven't installed a particular library.

So I'd imagine that an app that simply displays some text would work  
reliably on many different Linux distros, and so would fall into your  
desired definition of a standalone, but other, more complex apps  
might not, and so would fall into your undesired category.

None of this is peculiar to Revolution, it's simply due to the fact  
that different distros of Linux exist, which have different 'libraries'.

In the terms you have defined, mac and windows tend to have more  
'constant' libraries than Linux, whereas Linux tends to have more  
'variable' libraries than mac or windows. This makes life a bit  
harder for Linux developers, whichever language they use.

Best,

Mark

On 10 Jun 2006, at 00:27, Bob Warren wrote:

> Some people might think I am flogging a dead horse. In my opinion,  
> the horse is still very much alive, and this fact has enormous  
> consequences for Rev Linux users, not only in theoretical terms but  
> also in terms of practices.
>
> According to what has been discussed under the thread "Linux  
> Installation", the answer to the question "When is a standalone not  
> a standalone?" is "When it is a Rev application".
>
> I have had all kinds of explanations about the history of the term,  
> reminders of my lack of knowledge about what really happens  
> internally in an OS, etc. However, I find myself in a position  
> where the whole business is still as clear as mud, and I don't know  
> what to do in terms of the distribution of my Rev applications for  
> Linux.
>
> Let me try introducing a new concept. The terms "constant" and  
> "variable" are familiar to us all, but have you ever thought of  
> applying  such terms to libraries? According to this idea:
>
> a) "Constant" libraries are contained within an OS (in the case of  
> Linux, probably within the kernel). They are responsible, for  
> example, for the everyday I-O of reading/writing to the file  
> system, and so on.
> In the case of Linux, such constant libraries are common to all  
> distros.
>
> b) "Variable" libraries within an OS are the ones that can change  
> from time to time, or can be different between one distribution and  
> another.
>
> When I tried to define "standalones" previously, I said more or  
> less what I am going to say now, but without the new terminology.  
> Modified with the terminology, we now have the following  
> hypothetical definitions:
>
> "Standalone", used to mean what it says rather than in relation to  
> its historical X-Talk significance, means:
>
> EITHER:
> 1) A program which in no way refers to any type of library within  
> the runtime OS
>
> OR:
> 2) A program which depends on "constant" libraries in the runtime  
> OS only.
>
> To these 2 types of program we need to add non-standalones:
> 3) A program which makes use of "variable" libraries in the runtime  
> OS.
>
> I had hoped that Rev "standalones" belonged to category 2, not  
> therefore requiring any kind of "installation" in the normal (e.g.  
> Windows) sense of the term. People tell me theoretically that they  
> belong to category 3 and that they therefore do require a full- 
> blown installation.
>
> Since I am not essentially a religious kind of person, I try very  
> hard to believe what people tell me, but unfortunately I need to  
> see things with my own eyes in practice in order to be 100%  
> convinced. So far, nobody has told me of a Rev standalone that  
> cannot be transferred successfully to other distros of Linux (of  
> course, leaving aside the question of different references it might  
> make to the different characteristics of the particular file  
> system). Only time will tell whether Rev standalones really belong  
> in one category or another by this empirical method.
>
> Of course, one person who should know about this better than any  
> other is Mark Waddingham, Rev's chief technical officer. Now, an  
> amusing picture conjures itself up in my imagination. There's Kevin  
> with a whip in his hand and there's Mark with beads of sweat on his  
> brow doing his daily debugging. And Mark gingerly raises his right  
> hand and mutters, "Can I go for a wee wee-wee?". And the stern  
> reply is "Later!". So I won't send any e-mails to Mark, but it  
> would be nice (if ever he gets time to read the UR-List) if he  
> could give us a position as to what the status of the Rev  
> "standalones" (especially in Linux) is supposed to be.
> Or perhaps somebody could jump on him at RevCon? How about you,  
> Richard?  It's your thread (I didn't steal it - just borrowed it  
> for a while)!!
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution