Sam Kuper wrote:
> With apologies for cross-posting.
>
> Dear all,
>
> I have copied below the text of a blog post* I wrote a few minutes
> ago, because it addresses an issue in Debian and Debian-derived
> distros that I've encountered several times, and which no doubt many
> people encounter frequ
"Sam Kuper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> A number of comments missed my main point, which was:
>
> When 'stable' packages don't work, or are inadequately documented,
> it's a pain because the upstream developers (who are otherwise often
> the first port of call for help and documentation) may no
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 12:13:42AM +, Sam Kuper wrote:
> When 'stable' packages don't work, or are inadequately documented, it's a
> pain because the upstream developers (who are otherwise often the first port
> of call for help and documentation) may no longer support the version of the
> so
Dear all,
I'm grateful for your comments on this thread. I've learned about a few
parts of the Debian system I wasn't aware of before (volatile/sloppy) and
have been pleased to see a range of perspectives, including from upstream of
the distro.
A number of comments missed my main point, which was:
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:40 AM, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is very common for software developers to plow ahead without thinking
> much about the versions the distros provide.
>
> You may want to contact them and see how they would expect users to use
> their software effectively.
>
John Hasler wrote:
> Koh Choon Lin writes:
>> It seems to me the cleanest form of manual package management is still
>> the old DOS style. All the files of a single program lies in one
>> directory
>
> Each with its own copy of all its dependencies, including libc and all
> other libraries it cal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Caruso wrote:
> Please remove me from this chain of nonsense
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
;-)
Johannes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU
-
From: John Hasler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:01 AM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: When stability is pointless
Koh Choon Lin writes:
> It seems to me the cleanest form of manual package management is still
> the old DOS style. All the file
Koh Choon Lin writes:
> It seems to me the cleanest form of manual package management is still
> the old DOS style. All the files of a single program lies in one
> directory
Each with its own copy of all its dependencies, including libc and all
other libraries it calls and all the programs and dae
On 11/05/08 07:25, Koh Choon Lin wrote:
[snip]
It seems to me the cleanest form of manual package management is still
the old DOS style. All the files of a single program lies in one
directory and to uninstall the program would just involve a simple
removal of the directory.
That works only in
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 09:25:24PM +0800, Koh Choon Lin wrote:
> >> > Are package managers necessary? Well, no.
> >>
> >> What We need this to keep consistency, ...
> >>
> >> > One way of managing software
> >> > is simply to install individual software programs/libraries as needed,
> >> > and
Koh Choon Lin wrote:
> It seems to me the cleanest form of manual package management is still
> the old DOS style. All the files of a single program lies in one
> directory and to uninstall the program would just involve a simple
> removal of the directory.
>
> If I recall correctly a few years ago
>> > Are package managers necessary? Well, no.
>>
>> What We need this to keep consistency, ...
>>
>> > One way of managing software
>> > is simply to install individual software programs/libraries as needed,
>> > and allow each item to handle its own updating or uninstallation (or
>> > even j
* Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008 Nov 05 06:05 -0600]:
> > Why have package managers?
> > --
> >
> > Are package managers necessary? Well, no.
>
> What We need this to keep consistency, ...
>
> > One way of managing software
> > is simply to install individual
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 01:26:31AM +, Sam Kuper wrote:
> When stability is pointless
> ===
>
> Many Linux distributions (and other software environments too) use
> package managers to facilitate the installation, upgrading and
> uninstallation of software packages
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 12:58:15PM +0200, Teemu Likonen wrote:
> Johannes Wiedersich (2008-11-05 11:31 +0100) wrote:
>
> > Sam Kuper wrote:
> >> Ubuntu has LTS (Long-Term Support) releases, which roughly translate
> >> to Stable.
> >
> > Yes, but IIRC it is still based on debian sid. Ie. it never
Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> Sam Kuper wrote:
>> 2008/11/5 Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> Or, are you saying that you are trying to implement a psad recipe from
>>> the internet that doesn't apply to the version of psad suppl
Johannes Wiedersich (2008-11-05 11:31 +0100) wrote:
> Sam Kuper wrote:
>> Ubuntu has LTS (Long-Term Support) releases, which roughly translate
>> to Stable.
>
> Yes, but IIRC it is still based on debian sid. Ie. it never
> transitioned debians unstable - testing - stable queue. IIRC it just
> mean
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Sam Kuper wrote:
> 2008/11/5 Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Or, are you saying that you are trying to implement a psad recipe from
>> the internet that doesn't apply to the version of psad supplied in
>> Ubuntu?
>
> Essentially correct.
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 02:41:52AM +, Sam Kuper wrote:
> Hi Doug,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> 2008/11/5 Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Or, are you saying that you are trying to implement a psad recipe from
> > the internet that doesn't apply to the version of psad supplied in
It is very common for software developers to plow ahead without thinking
much about the versions the distros provide.
You may want to contact them and see how they would expect users to use
their software effectively.
It's likely: They won't care.
Open-source suffers from not having the "re
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 11:48:05AM +0800, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> >Define "working" (or "tweaking"). My experience with some packages in
> >Etch suggest that Debian sometimes has problems like this too.
>
> So far I can understand, Etch is not yet stable.
Etch is so stable, it will soon be old-st
Hello,
Sam Kuper wrote:
Hi Doug,
Thanks for your comments.
2008/11/5 Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Or, are you saying that you are trying to implement a psad recipe from
the internet that doesn't apply to the version of psad supplied in
Ubuntu?
Essentially correct. But not just any
Hi Doug,
Thanks for your comments.
2008/11/5 Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Or, are you saying that you are trying to implement a psad recipe from
> the internet that doesn't apply to the version of psad supplied in
> Ubuntu?
Essentially correct. But not just any old set of psad instruc
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 01:26:31AM +, Sam Kuper wrote:
[snip long preamble]
> Sometimes, stability lets you down.
>
> My perception is that the greatest problems with the system of
> "stability" practised by Debian and other Linux communities arise when
> the upstream developer has not mainta
25 matches
Mail list logo
