jett wrote: but its stupid how fedora does this and ubuntu does not. its annoying and inconsistent.
To that part I agree. But you see the problem? You'd have to get the Fedora, the Ubuntu and the SUSE people on the same table, have them talk to each other, have them to agree to some sorts of common standard ... And this was tried in the past, e.g. with the "LSB" and so forth. And this stuff still hasn't gone anywhere yet.
So it's simpler if you setup your .bashrc and .profile in a really good way and then just copy those files whenever you install a new Linux distro and/or get an user account somewhere somehow.
jett wrote: Portable Operating System Interface for Unix
Exactly. This stuff defines how programs and the operating system talk to each other ... it has next to nothing to do with commands such as "ll" working or not
And Linux complies "mostly". What's different is some I/O stuff and some error codes the OS is supposed to throw up when some stuff goes wrong. Torvalds was writing Linux from scratch back in 1991, and he didn't have access to that expensive documentation (back then) so he came up with his own solutions in some cases; And so far nobody has really cared to have Linux POSIX certified in all those years. Not that it really matters, there aren't really many programs where this would have any influence whatsoever. You can compile most UNIX programs on Linux and vice versa, so whatever the POSIX compliance of Linux, it's obviously good enough. But again, this has no meaning what the names of certain user-space commands are supposed to be like or not. Take HP-UX
as an example ... Both are fully POSIX compliant and yet the differences between the commands of the two are so drastic to the point where one and the same command has a different meaning on both of them
jett wrote: it would only make to much sense though. i believe in unity like there should be only one type of package management system and one type of window management system that is highly customizable.
It's called freedom
... e.g. Freedom of choice
jett wrote: it doesn't make sense to have multiple types. it only creates more work for developers than if they were to work on one project together.
But what if they do not want
to work together? Their freedom grants them this possibility too. And we are free to choose whose project / product we will use or not. Nobody is forced to anything.
jett wrote: so if there is a standard like POSIX and maybe a shell standard then distro's should follow
Well, they are following it. But whether or not aliases are defined or not and what aliases are defined or not just isn't part of the standard
See above. I just copy over my shell profile to all my accounts on all distros and I don't need to worry about those things any longer.
jett wrote: just like how opera is fully w3c compliant and suprise suprise Firefox is not.
Well .... how often are you forced to render smileys via HTML?
Whatever the compliance level of Firefox I think it's good enough for everyday use.
Oh well ... maybe the folks at Mozilla will improve Firefox over the next few releases?