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

Re: Upgrading X shouldn't overwrite XF86Config, or should it?

On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 09:32:19AM +0100, Mikael Hedin wrote:
> Well, /usr/bin/dexconf is a part of xserver-common, but actually, the
> problem was that xserver-xfree86.postinst called dexconf and clobbered
> the files.

This is a popular lie.  The files aren't "clobbered", they're backed up
and replaced.

"Clobbered" means the file is lost.

> > 2) have you bothered to support your opinion with facts, such as an
> >    understanding of how 4.1.0-11 works?
> This was for 4.1.0-10, as the bug report says.
> Did you read the bug-report, including the version info? 

Of course.  Do you recognize my right to fix bugs?

Or are you going to snipe at me about bugs in, say, XFree86,
that have been fixed in more recent versions for years?

Hint: if you're going to run unstable, run unstable.  Don't put a
package on hold as soon as you find a behavior that pisses you off,
locking yourself into this version so that you can bitch about it
forever more, while it goes rectified in later versions to which you
refuse to upgrade.

Alternatively, pay attention to the world around you.

G. Branden Robinson                |     Suffer before God and ye shall be
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     redeemed.  God loves us, so He
branden@debian.org                 |     makes us suffer Christianity.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     -- Aaron Dunsmore

Attachment: pgprvQudMMyZa.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: