I for one am glad that FatELF has met its maker. The idea has many pros and cons but the pros don’t outweigh the cons. Especially for a feature that enables proprietary binaries to work better at the expense of free software as a whole.
Pros:
1) A user can now easily install software using their web browser and download sites. (danger, untrusted)
2) A user does not have to worry about 32-bit or 64-bit when downloading from the web.
3) A user does not have to manage his package manager making sure his dependencies are met.
4) Would Anger Ulrich Dapper
Cons:
1) Executables are double size (for dual x86 and x86_64), more than double size if you want more (ARM, MIPS, PPC, ETC).
2) Waste of drive space. Extra copies of libraries and more than double the size executables.
3) LiveCD’s for the desktop are now worthless as no apps will fit. LiveDVD’s will be required and will cause higher bandwidth costs.
4) Bandwidth required for updates to FatELF packages will be higher.
5) A massive learning curve for those already maintaining packages.
6) FatELF binaries have libraries built in which may be obsolete due to security or bug fixes, feature additions or optimizations which improve speed.
7) Benefits proprietary software over free software. The main goal is to be able to run a “binary” on any GNU/Linux system without dependencies.
Let’s take a look at the pros again, and face them off against another solution: Package Managers.
1) A user can easily install a package without using their web browser or untrusted download sites.
2) A user does not need to worry if they are using 32 or 64 bit when using their package manager.
3) This isn’t even an issue if the user obtains all his software via the Package Manager. If the user is downloading random binaries off the web he might run into issues.
Other solutions:
1) Instead of worrying about the user not downloading 32 or 64-bit correctly, defaulting to a 64-bit ISO is probably the best option.
2) Making the user more aware of the advantages and existence of their package manager through education. A distribution could have some sort of automated help system activate upon first boot. People coming from Windows don’t mind downloading untrusted binaries all over the web and don’t mind requiring anti-virus so they don’t assume Package Management exists like the rest of us. I’ve had friends (who have used PC’s 10+ years) tell me they didn’t like Linux, citing installing software from the web as a hurdle but not understanding what Synaptic does.
3) Insult people who say refer to 32 and 64-bit as plural (ie, “bits”).
