1 |
Mark David Dumlao wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 4:42 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
>> Mark David Dumlao wrote: |
4 |
>>> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
5 |
>>>> Feel free to set me straight tho. As long as you don't tell me my |
6 |
>>>> system is broken and has not been able to boot for the last 9 years |
7 |
>>>> without one of those things. ROFL |
8 |
>>> Nobody's telling you _your_ system, as in the collection of programs |
9 |
>>> you use for your productivity, is broken. What we're saying is that |
10 |
>>> _the_ system, as in the general practice as compared to the |
11 |
>>> specification, is broken. Those are two _very_ different things. |
12 |
>> From what I have read, they are saying what has worked for decades has |
13 |
>> been broken the whole time. Doesn't matter that it works for millions |
14 |
>> of users, its broken. |
15 |
> Yes, that is exactly what they are saying. What I am pointing out, |
16 |
> however, is that there is, informally, a _technical meaning_ for the |
17 |
> word "broken", which is that "the specs don't match the |
18 |
> implementation". And in the case of /usr, the specs don't match the |
19 |
> implementation. For like, maybe all of the Linuxen. |
20 |
> |
21 |
>> They say it is broken so they can "fix it" with a |
22 |
>> init thingy for EVERYONE. Sorry, that's like telling me my car has been |
23 |
>> broken for the last ten years when I have been driving it to town and it |
24 |
>> runs just fine. |
25 |
> NOBODY is telling you your system or that the systems of millions of |
26 |
> users out there aren't booting. You're assigning emotional baggage to |
27 |
> technical language. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> To push your analogy, oh, your car is working just fine. Now anyone |
30 |
> with a pair of spark plugs and a few tools may be able to start it |
31 |
> without you, but your startup _works_. Now imagine some German |
32 |
> engineer caring nothing about you lowly driver, and caring more about |
33 |
> the car as a system, and he goes using fancy words like |
34 |
> "authentication systems" and declaring that "all cars have a flaw", or |
35 |
> more incensingly, "car security is fundamentally broken" (Cue angry |
36 |
> hordes of owners pitchfork and torching his house). |
37 |
> |
38 |
> Thing is, he's right, and if he worked out some way for software to |
39 |
> verify that machine startup was done using the keys rather than spark |
40 |
> plugs, he'd be doing future generations a favor in a dramatic |
41 |
> reduction of carjackings. And if somehow it became mandated for future |
42 |
> cars to have this added in addition to airbags and whatnot, it'd annoy |
43 |
> the hell out of car makers but overall still be a good thing. |
44 |
> |
45 |
> And here the analogy is holding up: NOBODY is breaking into your car |
46 |
> and forcefully installing some authentication system in its startup. |
47 |
> And NOBODY is breaking into your servers and forcing you to switch to |
48 |
> udev/systemd or merged /usr. You can still happily plow along with |
49 |
> your system as is. Heck, you can even install current udev without |
50 |
> changing your partition setup. Just modify the ebuild and have it |
51 |
> install it into / instead of /usr. Or use an early bootup script. Or |
52 |
> use an init thingy. |
53 |
> |
54 |
>> The udev/systemd people sound like politicians. |
55 |
> If anything, Lennart is the worst possible politician on the planet. |
56 |
> He makes unpopular decisions, mucks around in stuff people don't want |
57 |
> touched, talks snide and derisively, etc etc etc, because he's a |
58 |
> nerd's nerd that knows nothing about PR and goodwill. The software is |
59 |
> good, but that's about all he knows how to write. He's like DJB on |
60 |
> crack. |
61 |
> -- |
62 |
> This email is: [ ] actionable [ ] fyi [x] social |
63 |
> Response needed: [ ] yes [x] up to you [ ] no |
64 |
> Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate [ ] soon [x] none |
65 |
> |
66 |
> |
67 |
|
68 |
I think your analogy actually proves my point. Instead of just getting |
69 |
in the car and turning the key, they want to reinvent the engine and how |
70 |
it works. It doesn't matter that it is and has been working for decades, |
71 |
|
72 |
Thanks for proving my point tho. LOL |
73 |
|
74 |
Dale |
75 |
|
76 |
:-) :-) |
77 |
|
78 |
-- |
79 |
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! |