Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 3.8 and external drivers

[Yuri K. Shatroff]

On 12.03.2013 12:46, Alexander Schwarz wrote:
> Am 12.03.2013 08:33, schrieb Yuri K. Shatroff:
>>
>> Again, following your logic, why not just let the user himself
>> ./configure && make && make install as in old days? What is portage
>> for?
>
> Following your logic, if there's even one tool to make life easier
> everything has to be absolutely easy. So we should now utilize fancy
>  wizards? Once again, that's following your logic.

not "has to be easy", but definitely, with such purpose.
Do you disagree? Perhaps you reckon that the whole purpose of computing
is to make life harder? :)

>>
>> That is a testing issue. Of course, one can never know what will
>> change, or whether the code contains a bug (before one is
>> detected), but when someone *does* stumble upon such issues, it is
>> up to maintainers to update portage to prevent the issue... that's
>> what portage is for, isn't it? That said, the topic starter has run
>> across an issue and I assume the action to be taken by the package
>> maintainer is to add a test against kernel compatibility and
>> eligibility of the native driver, so that in the future the issue
>> not rise again. Am I right? Or do I completely misunderstand the
>> purpose of portage, and everything?
>
> First of all: Gentoo relies on volunteers to do work as testing. If
> something fails they CAN report it (like he did via this userlist).
> You're requesting enterprise features (everything tested to a great
> extent for every piece of hardware)? That's cool, because you can
> help. Just invest some time and help testing, everyone would be
> grateful. Without those reports portage can't know. It's a tool and
> not a thinking human being, as such it's limited in many ways. How
> should it know that something will break other things if nobody tells
> it?

The case in question is exactly that: the user (Daniel Wagener)
experienced an issue and reported it. He was *the* tester. He
encountered a problem. He helped. He wrote *the* report. I believe he is
to be thanked, rather than to blame. Maybe he expressed his feelings too
harshly, but it's comprehensible to an extent.

>>>> 4. How and why would you expect to force all users to grep thru
>>>> kernel src in search for a driver they might need, especially
>>>> when the portage explicitly lists this driver? Also sometimes
>>>> kernel drivers' description is not quite consistent and it is
>>>> not easy to figure out whether it supports exactly yours
>>>> card/chip/device, or moreover find it by grep.
>>>
>>> All kernel source? grep? Nope. Just reading a bit of help text.
>>> Maybe using google. Doing it once.
>>
>> As I said, there is not always good help text for kernel options.
>>
>
> I tend to agree but then again: why even bother compiling the Linux
> kernel if it's too tedious?

Not quite. The big deal is not compiling the kernel itself, but finding
out options which are applicable or conversely useless for one. And
don't say that's an easy task even for those who are familiar.
I personally am not always in mood to tinker with those new
CONFIG_SOMETHING_WHICH_NOBODY_YET_UNDERSTANDS_WHAT_IT_S_FOR_AND_IS_GONNA_BE_RENAMED_AFTER_TWENTY_EIGHT_VERSIONS
which neither kernel.org nor google can clearly explain. But then it
turns out that you need that (or need that removed) for another thingy
to work.
Probably the task of "just compiling the kernel" appears to user much
more horrible than it really is. Not counting the options...

>>> Then you have a working setup you can use for the rest of
>>> eternity (or the next couple of years...)
>>
>> Okay, and when someone like the topic starter *did* have a working
>>  setup with the "superfluous" driver from portage, ... do you feel
>> the logic? :) When should one realize that this setup is no more
>> working? I guess, just after it stopped working, right? :) Of
>> course, again, if one is really concerned he will check each kernel
>> release or whatever for the new stuff he's concerned about, but
>> when all *worked*, why should he?
> There are distributions out there who take care of *this*.  Instead
> of utilizing them you're trying to redefine Gentoo in a manner that
> more suits you. This is highly illogical, as alternatives are out
> there with the exact same thing you'd like to see.

Sorry I didn't get what you meant by *this*. All I'm trying to say is
that every software is for the user, and blaming user for software 
deficiencies is unfair. I regard the case in question as a deficiency.
Would you disagree? I can't find a basis to think the opposite, but if 
you can, I'd be interested. :)

>> so, according to that, everyone who's striving to get
>> linux/gentoo/whtever more user-friendly (including portage's key
>> features) is an ubuntoid? You know, I came from FreeBSD where
>> you're supposed to do much more work by hand, and after a dozen
>> years I'm a little bit tired of that. I *can* do without things
>> like portage's colorful output, for example (although it's helpful
>> most of the time). But I really dislike things broken e.g. on
>> `portupgrade -aR` and the sort and I can *not* call a system which
>> allows that a quality system. That sort of user-friendliness has
>> nothing to do with ubuntism ("we know better what you want") and
>> visual beauty: that's about quality. (I know that there's no
>> absolute quality, but when a system tends to fail, and justifies
>> that with "user not having googled or having taken a way we, devs,
>> didn't ever think to go" -- it's at least incorrect if not
>> arrogant.)
>
> You're mixing up Linux and distributions. Linux is a kernel, not
> more, not less. If the distribution is user friendly or not is
> defined for every single distribution. The problem I see here: you
> want Gentoo to do certain things for you which is in direct conflict
> to Gentoo's principles. Gentoo really was never meant for the
> beginner, nor was it meant for the expert who just wants to USE
> things and SOMETIMES change crucial parts of the system.

I'm mixing up as long as both linux and gentoo and other software are 
software which all serve one purpose: to solve user's tasks. And as for 
me, all principles are the consequences of this, and not the opposite.
I don't like the way of personification you resort to (including your 
opinion of what I do or want which can not be correct), but personally, 
even not being a beginner, I do not expect things to break every now and 
then. Probably that's why I'm using Gentoo: because the breakage 
probability in it (if used properly) is less than in some other distro 
which is not under one's control.
I suppose, most users don't care what for Gentoo was meant, why it fares 
the way it fares: users care for the way it suits their needs. As for 
me, saying "if this or that don't work, you guys must know that this 
distro wasn't meant for working right..." is like "you are too stupid to 
use it" or even more humiliating.

> In my personal opinion it's highly arrogant to download a
> distribution, seeing that you obviously don't like it (which is
> absolutely fine) and then jump on the mailing list. Patronizing
> everyone and telling them how that system should exactly change that
> it's acceptable in your eyes.

> But, that's the whole beauty of open source: you can do things
> exactly your way by forking, helping as a dev/tester, developing your
> own things if you hate them, etc... And before you tell me: "you want
> to troll me". Nope, I'm dead serious. Open source is all about
> getting involved if you want to change things. Other certain
> operating systems don't even give you that choice and are more like:
> like it or leave it.

I'm also involved. Even participating on the list and expressing my 
opinion does it.
Though in this very case, I just said (and it was really *all* I wanted 
to say), don't blame the guy for the fact which is clearly (to me) an 
issue of the package. Did I say that since there's such an issue then 
the whole gentoo is bad? :) Or that smth else is bad? No. If you still 
maintain that it was not an issue but "the way it's meant to be", it's 
your option, and I have exhausted my arguments. :)

I'm sorry for having you see things I didn't mean, and also sorry for 
starting this "personalities exchange" since I don't think that mailing 
lists are a good place for personal opinions.

-- 
Best wishes,
Yuri K. Shatroff