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

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

Erik Hollensbe wrote:
> And I would have never written the mail in the first place if I had felt
> that it was my system config that was causing the problem. I have been
> running almost vanilla unstable to the T since potato was unstable on this
> system, and *NEVER* had install issues like this on it. 

Please bear in mind that many of us have been running unstable since
before Debian was released (at all), and fondly remember many fun little
incidents like ld.so completly breaking. Tends to put minor breakage in

> The breaking of man and groff are inexcusable at best

I still haven't seen a bug report about it.

> and with dpkg's dependency on perl,

joey@kite:~>dpkg -p  dpkg |grep Depends   
Pre-Depends: libc6 (>= 2.1.97), libncurses5, libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2

> perl should be coming with those modules as well as dpkg, with dpkg
> providing upgrades.

<parse error>

> My general point (which most of you missed), was that I was using
> unstable. Not woody, not sid, unstable.

sid == unstable

> I ran the dist-upgrade shortly
> after finding out about the testing<->unstable merge

testing != unstable

> However, I can't even reconfigure, simply because the important packages
> never made it to the configure stage. This system is nigh unto hosed until
> I'm able to manually unpack the right packages with the proper perl
> modules and copy them to the proper spots, to fullfill these dependencies
> manually. Package management should have guarded against this, or at least
> provided me with an out (or at worst, checked itself and warned me).

I'm willing to bet that if you would bother to do what everyone told you
to do and file a bug with the actual text of the problem you are
experiencing, that you would get a solution in short order. 

Since you instead continue to piss and moan and display your lack of
clue, enjoy your broken Debian system. It might stay broken for a good
long time.

see shy jo

Reply to: