| 1 |
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:58:44 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Thursday 15 June 2006 05:39, Peter wrote: |
| 4 |
>> On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 04:29:44 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 5 |
>> > being able to download patchsets from the internet, touchup a few |
| 6 |
>> > lines so they apply without rejects, and releasing the result to the |
| 7 |
>> > rest of the world deserves no respect/regard ... you've proven you |
| 8 |
>> > have skills at: |
| 9 |
>> > - wget |
| 10 |
>> > - patch |
| 11 |
>> > - an editor |
| 12 |
>> > - tar |
| 13 |
>> > |
| 14 |
>> > the respect/regard comes when the compiled kernel *actually performs* |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> I respect your opinion. But, does that mean e17 should be removed, |
| 17 |
>> because it really has a lot of problems (like its file manager), or all |
| 18 |
>> it's libraries? How about wine? Just because a project may entail risk, |
| 19 |
>> should not eliminate it from being considered for inclusion in the tree |
| 20 |
>> OR in an overlay. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> you really dont get it |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Maybe I just don't :( |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> e17 doesnt break the whole system |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Any alpha software can. Read the warning label. e17 has caused me to hit |
| 29 |
the big red switch on several occasions. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> wine doesnt break the whole system |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
It can trash lots of files. Seen it. Been there. Oh, and one other little |
| 35 |
nasty about wine, you can get hit with a virus, and depending on how your |
| 36 |
local drives are configured, this can be a bad thing. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> a pos kernel breaks the entire system and wastes everyone's time as it can |
| 39 |
> cause *any package at all* to crash and have bug reports filed about that |
| 40 |
> package |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Any "good" kernel, improperly configured or used can do the same. "Why |
| 44 |
doesn't usb work? Why doesn't nvidia work? Why doesn't ssh-fuse not |
| 45 |
compile? Why can't I access my home filesystem?" etc. How many users |
| 46 |
installed hardened or sellinux and went "Oh sh*t" |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
> your little sub thread here wasnt about different bleeding edge |
| 49 |
> packages, it was about the obviously incorrect statement that kernel |
| 50 |
> sources has no adverse affect on any other package -mike |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
Listen, I'm not going to prolong this. My point was and IS that sources |
| 53 |
are just that. They are not applications. They must be configured |
| 54 |
correctly to run. If you're going to promote and publish -mm and -ck, then |
| 55 |
you can't rightly call a source based on -ck a "pos kernel." Maybe by your |
| 56 |
standards, but not by mine, or the others who follow this particular |
| 57 |
thread on bz and the forums. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
The point of the thread, and I already did my mea culpa for using a kernel |
| 60 |
source as an example, was to try and present a user's pov wrt to Sunrise |
| 61 |
and how it may benefit the community by hosting such projects. As I wrote |
| 62 |
to ciaranm, it's hard to micromanage and control every user's private |
| 63 |
installations once the initial install and build has completed. |
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
There's lots of evil out there, but kernel sources are no worse than a pos |
| 66 |
application or alpha software. |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
Obviously, I'm not winning any converts here -- but that was not my |
| 69 |
intent. Anything else I write would be redundant. And, should I continue |
| 70 |
to fight this, I'd only be a hypocrite by continuing this thread when I |
| 71 |
chastise others for making these darn things too long! If you have |
| 72 |
particular comments, please contact me off list. |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
I'll be lurking at the council meeting though. That should be fun! |
| 75 |
|
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
-- |
| 78 |
Peter |
| 79 |
|
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
-- |
| 82 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives