<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:31 PM, geoffrey mendelson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:geoffreymendelson@gmail.com">geoffreymendelson@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">
<br></div>
Because UBUNTU is not intended for people who want to customize their system beyond adding or subtracting whole packages. If you want a feature not compiled in, you can do it, but are no longer able to use their packages which means not using their update and dependency system.<br>
<br>
If want to add something they don't include you can, but if it depends upon a library they do include, there is no way to stop it from being updated and your program breaking.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'm curious, since I'm having the very same problem on CentOS/RHEL. There are many basic packages which just doesn't exist in the main repository (say, python 2.6) and I'm not sure how to add them in a nice way to the distro.</div>
<div>Currently I'm just `make install`ing it from the source, but it has all the downsides you mentioned.</div><div>I'm not sure what's bad with Ubuntu/good with Fedora which magically solves this problem.</div>
<div><br></div><div>(and BTW, customizing your OS beyond adding packages, is, sadly, not a great idea in any distribution in the current Linux state of affairs)</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
They also do not test very well, I've had to use older kernels when the latest new one would not boot.<br><br></blockquote><div>I'm all with you for that. What I really like in recent versions of Windows, is that everything is so highly QA'd it rarely fails. Ubuntu managed to break during the fresh installation from the liveCD on Dell Inspiron 1525 (ie not some bizarre hardware), I had to go through some hoops to finish the installation.</div>
</div></div>