On 01-05-25 andrea gelmini wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 10:32:41AM +0200, Michael Neuffer wrote:
> > Exactly this brain damaged behaviour is why we have
> > so many (useless mini)packages !
> i don't think this is stupid. if I want one thing, I want
> that one, and only that. using packages it's good, because I
> can manage with the software on my computer.
Oh, so you are stil able to browse the complete list of packages from
unstable, why installing debian on a new pc:
[seteuid:~]-51> apt-cache stats
Total Package Names : 9679 (387k)
Normal Packages: 7078
Pure Virtual Packages: 140
Single Virtual Packages: 338
Mixed Virtual Packages: 102
Missing: 2021
And now we shall add about 40 packages to this number and still be able
to install a pc with debian in about 2-3 hours, which is the normal time
for an installation of an os, even if you have a slow machine.
> > There are more then enough machines around that already have
> > problems with the package management. Machines that must run
> > with 16 or maybe 8 MB of memory (or even less) with an 386sx/16
> > CPU or similar.
> do you really install useless and heavy, for ram and cpu, kde
> themes on such machines?
Oh, so you assume that all users of KDE, have a 1 Ghz Athlon, 512MB RAM,
40GB hard-disk and so on? Get real, there are lots of users, who have
smaller machines and still want to use KDE.
> > Not everbody can like you afford the latest and greatest
> > machines with GHz CPUs, hundereds of MBs of memory and huge
> > harddisks.
> exactly, huge hd... if i want a themes of 100kb, i don't want
> to download and install megabytes...
But instead you would have no problem, if dpkg and apt will run slower
because the package list increase with lots of those small (unneeded)
packages, because some minority of users likes them?
> > We have now more then 500 Debian developers and if everbody
> > would follow your exceedingly stupid example, we would very
> > quickly have on the border to 30.000 packages !
> > Who on earth would want to dig through such masses of packages ?
> ususally people thinks it's good to have a lot of packages
> in their distributions.
> do you thins that a big choise is a bad thing?
Big Choice != Lots of Packages
> > hell and they rather switch to SuSE or RedHat where you don't
> > have to choose.
> a) there are task-packages.
Who, when was a SuSE-Task-Package introduced into Debian?
> b) these are marketing things, and i don't really care. i use
> debian for technical reasons.
You maybe doing this, but we should also care about the other users out
there, who use debian not only for technical reasons.
> seems microsoft approach... big packages full of everything,
> dictation on packages available for users...
Sorry to say, but this is idiotic. Michael is absolutely right in
complaining that we don't need to add another 40 mini theme packages,
when 3-6 medium theme packages will also work. This has nothing to do
with a microsoft approach, since no dicatation is done. Ben is still
free to add 40 packages, but he got suggestion to use another approach.
If you can't make a destinction between discussion some ideas for a
package on a list and the realisation of the packages, then please stop
this discussion.
Christian
--
Debian Developer (http://www.debian.org)
1024/26CC7853 31E6 A8CA 68FC 284F 7D16 63EC A9E6 67FF 26CC 7853
Attachment:
pgphpUj4SWy0A.pgp
Description: PGP signature