Re: how to make Debian less fragile (long and philosophical)
On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Marek Habersack wrote:
> * Justin Wells said:
>
> > > Potato is unstable. Unstable is, by definition "fragile". No one running a
> > > production machine is ever encouraged to use packages from unstable.
> >
> > I'm not complaining that it actually crashed here, so much as I am
> > complaining that this is just a disaster waiting to happen, whether
> > potato is marked stable or unstable--it's fundamentally in there.
> And, as I said before, dynamic linking can break anywhere, not only in an
> unstable distro.
FUD
If what you say were true, you would be arguing that NO programs should be
dynamicly linked. That would be stupid.
Dynamic linking only breaks when there is something wrong. Building a
distribution is a coordinated integration task, and when all of the
pieces-parts aren't compatible for one reason or another problems like the
recent bash failure show up...and then we fix it.
Slink had at least one incident of a bash installation failure during its
unstable existance. Those problems were fixed and slink is now considered
"robust". This has nothing to do with dynamic linking.
Luck,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- See www.linuxpress.com for more details _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Reply to: