[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libc6 policy in unstable

> > > I'm not entirely certain I see why we need to remove libc5 packages from
> > > the system for Debian 2.0.  While I agree that the primary packages should
> > > really be glibc, I don't see how a few lib5 packages are going to hurt the
> > > distribution
> > 
> > Well, they won't hurt much, but they would:
> > 
> >  - make memory usage less favourable (if you're running a mix of
> >    libc5/libc6 binaries, you'll have both in memory).
> >  - make Debian look less attractive (We wouldn't appear in the
> >    list of distributions that are fully libc6).
> Could you please point me to such a list?

Of cource, there isn't such a list now (as far as I know, at least I
guess that list would be empty now).

> Anyways, Debian just can't compete with commercial distributions which can
> allow to suppose that they are self-contained. Debian is NOT. Unlike
> RedHat (which has, for instance its "own" Motif and Metro-X), we can't
> include ANY commercial product into the distribution.

So, why does that mean we cannot compete?
What has self-contained to do with Motif?

Anyway, Lars just posted a script to auto-build the whole distribution,
and I really think with such scripts (presumably improved ones, but
the one from Lars apparently already works) we will get a self-contained
distribution rather soon.

> They could recomplie them and have "fully libc6" distribution in a day.

Wait and see what Lars will do.

joost witteveen, joostje@debian.org
#!/usr/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
#what's this? see http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: