Re: "The Debian exim 4 packages suck badly" on firstname.lastname@example.org
Steve Greenland <email@example.com> writes:
> Jesus H. Christ. Read the original post to this thread. It was a
> complaint about how the upstream docs were not consistent with the
> debian config.
Huh? The original post AFAICT of this thread consisted of Marc Haber
complaining that it was inappropriate for Ian Jackson to complain
about Debian's packaging on the exim-users upstream mailing list.
Ian Jackson's complaint in that thread had nothing to do with
Marc Haber also referenced a bug, number #295391, reported by Ian
Jackson which appears to have started this, and in this bug, Ian is
complaining that when you ask for the one-file configuration, you
still see the tools for the many-file configuration installed. Ian
misunderstood what the exim package was doing; requesting the
single-file method does in fact get you the single-file method; he
incorrectly thought that this meant that /etc/exim4 shouldn't have
the other files in it at all.
He also reported a separate bug in the same bug report. Most of the
discussion in the bug log consists of Ian insisting that the way to
fix the bug he was seeing was to throw out whatever Debian was doing.
He also deleted exim from his machine and switch to smail, so it
became impossible to track down whatever the second bug was, as it
does not occur for the developer.
It reads rather like Ian throwing a tantrum, complaining that his
proposed solution ("this abomination should be thrown away and
rewritten") wasn't being taken seriously, and refusing to help find a
fix to the bug.
And then, taking his fight to the exim-users mailing list too.
Still, one piece of useful advice has come from the thread: that the
installation comment should tell the user what to do, rather than what
not to do.