On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 04:51:27AM -0400, Tom H wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Wouter Verhelst <wou...@debian.org> wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 03:48:09PM -0400, Tom H wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Wouter Verhelst <wou...@debian.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I didn't say RPM *doesn't* deal with changed files; I said ours
> >>> deals with it better. I stand by that.
> >>
> >> Sure; and an rpm or emerge user'll tell you that dpkg is inferior
> >> because an interactive upgrade's a crazy thing to do.
> >
> > Yes, sure. This discussion is getting increasingly side-tracked though.
> >
> > The original question was "should I install defaults in /etc or /usr?"
> > to which I replied that in Debian, we've traditionally done the former
> > rather than the latter, and that the latter feels like a result of an
> > ecosystem (other than ours) where dealing with conflicting changes to
> > configuration files is frowned upon. I think our way is better, but
> > I'm sure others disagree.
>
> If Debian decides to drop into "/etc" files that are dropped into
> "/usr/lib" (or "/lib") upstream because rpm and others can't handle
> config file upgrades, it would be a decision not based on facts.
You completely misunderstood what I said. EOT for me.
--
< ron> I mean, the main *practical* problem with C++, is there's like a dozen
people in the world who think they really understand all of its rules,
and pretty much all of them are just lying to themselves too.
-- #debian-devel, OFTC, 2016-02-12
