Re: bind9-chroot (was: questions on ITP)
On 27-Sep-01, 12:39 (CDT), Christian Kurz <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 01-09-26 Steve Greenland wrote:
> > The standard Debian distribution kernel is 2.2.
> And in which way does this force an administrator to use that kernel? He
> can safely downgrade to a 2.0.x kernel, if he ensured to use mount -O
Sigh. Of course it doesn't force an admin to use 2.2. Just like we're
not going to force them to use 2.4 to run a chroot bind. But we might
make it easier if they do. You were misusing the word "force", and I
misused it the same way to try to make a point. Apparently I missed.
> > Why? Because we don't change every aspect of our default system to cater
> > to their individual preferences? One of the reasons that there are so
> No, because we depend to much on new features instead of staying with
> the current feature set and building our solution around it.
2.4 == current release of the Linux kernel. We use new features all the
> That's another problem, but do you really want to get people to move to
> other distributions, just because we are not able to use cp,rscync or
> any other tool instead of mount --bind?
There are typically many ways to accomplish a task in Unix. We, Debian,
cannot provide options to do it every available way. Someone gets
to make a choice. Our Constitution says that person is the package
maintainer. If you don't like that, *you* put together an alternative
chroot-bind package that does it your way.
Steve Greenland <firstname.lastname@example.org>