Re: Future releases of Debian
Discussing via emails seems to get hard again...
* Joey Hess <firstname.lastname@example.org> [030725 16:37]:
> Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > Both a system presenting a utter mess of uneeded things and technical
> > terms and a system only saying "Installation successful" or
> > "Installation failed" are two ends of user-unfriendly behaviour.
> > While the first can be at least cured with a good documentation, the
> > last is simply frustrating.
> Luckily d-i falls in neither of these camps,
Did I ever said it was?
> since there are some smart people working on it.
Did I ever doubt this?
> I think you'd better use your time by learning about and contributing to
> d-i, rather than writing uninformed, generic commentary.
Thanks. If I'm discussing a generic topic (what is "userfriendly"),
I'll use generic commentary.
And contributing to the debian-installer can by no why done in the time
of writing few e-mails. (I don't want count the hours and days I could
have used for something reasonable, in whose I waited for build chroot's
to be made, bochs or plex86 to be started on 200 Mhz machines. In whoose
I negatively investigated if a genfat (including syslinux) was
writteable in readonable time to get around the root-problem, in which
looked for hardware to test d-i, looked if I could get a 2.4 or any
form of devfs compiling nicely for 2 sparc10 I could reserve for this
purpose, the time I used to get some SGI Indies, coping with the
weak-symbol-problem there, trying build debug-version of tip22,
just to realize that one of the bioses is broken. And all those nasty
things one needs many time to work around without any chance to get
Bernhard R. Link
Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing
an editor and a MTA.