Re: mindi fails on Linux Debian system
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 12:38:14PM -0800, Hugo Rabson wrote:
> First of all, I'm sorry about the 'crackpipe' reference. it was extremely silly.
>
> --- Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org> wrote:
> >The problem is that [Mindi] creates a rootfs (I believe) and copies
> >/sbin/lilo blindly to the new rootfs. Thus, you just have a broken shell
> >script.
>
> Mindi has been amended to look for lilo.real and use it instead of lilo if found. It's fair enough to expect Mindi to check for the gawk->awk softlink & work around its absence, although I expect the missing softlink has been replaced by now. I'm sure there are good technical reasons for Debian to be the only distro (that I've seen) to include cramfs in its kernel. However, what exactly is the reason why /sbin/lilo isn't the same for Debian as it is for every other distro I've seen?
Because Debian tries to cater to as many people as possible.
> Debian is designed for users to use, not developers to develop for (at least, I should hope it is). So, if a developer finds it hard to develop for Debian, that's unfortunate but not in itself grounds to instigate a change. Also, there aren't many standards in Linux anyway, so I guess it's fair enough if a given distro wants to go it alone & do things its own way.
Um, users don't look at whether /sbin/lilo is a bash script, or a
binary. Only developers do that.
> However, it would be nice if the #2 distro (or #3, depending on which person or organization you ask) didn't insist on being quite so different from all the rest. Some sort of de facto standard would be nice, either by being technically superior or just by doing things like everyone else. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
So, should we switch over to using /etc/rc.d/rc?.d/ too? Come on, you
can't expect every tiny implementation detail to be the same on every
distribution. The functionality remains the same for the most part.
> The /sbin/lilo.real issue and the gawk->awk issue are symptomatic of a greater problem. Debian doesn't exactly have the best reputation for user-friendliness as it is. Technical excellence at the expense of ease of use would be a Pyrrhic victory and an especially ironic one when Debian is about to make its first commercial release.
Userfriendliness is defined by the user, not by oddball programs that
expect every tiny detail to be exactly the same. You cannot say that
everything between RedHat, Slackware, Mandrake, SuSe, Caldera and
<!Debian> distros are all the same. There are minute differences between
them all. But they all function relatively the same despite the
under-the-hood differences. That doesn't mean everyone is doing anything
wrong.
> I'll continue to modify my software to keep up with changes in Debian, which outpace changes in all other distros put together (if my inbox is anything to go by, anyway), until I get sufficiently sick of chasing rainbows. Right now, Debian is the only distro to give me any kind of trouble. I should be grateful for small mercies.
If you want to continue this thread, fix your line-wrap. I would hope
that someone who rants the way you do would have some email etiquette.
--
.----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=-----.
/ Ben Collins -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: