Re: Woody upgrading problems, LILO and debconf
On Thu, 17 May 2001, Russell Coker wrote:
>On Wednesday 16 May 2001 22:42, Dale Scheetz wrote:
>> [1] LILO issues with debconf
>>
>> It was a bit disconcerting to go through the LILO debconf screens, first
>> being asked if you wish to modify lilo.conf, then when the answer is no
>
>On Wednesday 16 May 2001 22:50, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>> There is growing consensus that the lilo maintainer is trying to get
>> everyone to use grub due to frequent lilo screwups. The configuration
>> unfriendliness is only a part of the saga.
>
>Yesterday I uploaded a version of LILO with the debconf code removed. I had
Ahhh: the debconf code. WHAT IN HELL'S NAME WERE YOU DOING RUNNING
DEBCONF ON A BINARY NOT IN YOUR PACKAGE?! Install-mbr, from a decision
that was made years ago, is in its own package. Is there NO file that you
won't fuck with in order to make your trivial modifications? Once upon a
time, unstable meant that "things will break, but you can rest assured
that the developer isn't going to break your system unless they've
considered it carefully". It seems that nowadays Unstable means "things
will break, and at a developers whim".
>announced my plans to do so to both debian-devel and debian-user a week ago.
Yay! You announced it. If I announce that I intend to upload a trojan to
d-d and d-u, does that change the damage done?
>It seems that neither of you reads those lists properly.
It seems that YOU don't read policy properly, but that didn't stop you
from doing the damage...
>During the time that I have been maintaining LILO I have fixed a number of
>bugs that had been outstanding for over a year before I took over. This
...and caused numerous others, including a major one that leaked into
testing.
>includes bugs in the upstream source (the patches in question have been
>accepted by the upstream maintainer). I have announced my intention to fix
>all bugs reported against LILO before woody is frozen, and I believe that I
>am on track to achieve this. Am I really doing such a bad job?
You intend to patch all bugs in a package just before all bugs MUST be
patched... what, do you want a cookie?
>
>Russell Coker
>
>
>PS I am working at a site with 8 new VA server machines and no VACM software
>to manage them. I had volunteered to package it but was informed that Shaleh
>was doing it and ceased my work. Now I'm leaving the site in a week (and
>losing all access to VA hardware) so I can't do it. Is a VACM package ever
>going to be produced? Or is my client going to feel forced to resume
>purchasing Sun hardware in future which needs no such software?
Okay, two cookies.
>PPS Shaleh, please note that when I publically flame people I CC them a copy
>of the message as a courtesy to give them the best opportunity to respond. I
>expect to receive the same courtesy.
Funny, I CC them so as to ensure that they got the message, not because of
any altruism...
>
--
<a mailto:galt@inconnu.isu.edu>Who is John Galt?</a>
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.
-- Ferenc Mantfeld
Reply to: