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

Re: Logging practices (and why does it suck in Debian?)

On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 01:31:49PM -0600, Tim Uckun wrote:
> >
> >  Doesn't win2k do what you suggest, and have a the dlls for each app in a
> >directory for that app?
> Not really. Some are others are in winsys others are in program 
> files/shared  etc.  Since W2K also absolutely trusts Microsoft and 
> Microsoft installs and upgrades are notorious for breaking things it's kind 
> of a useless implementation. Sure I can't write an app which will overwrite 
> an important DLL but the ADO people at MS can and when you upgrade IE or 
> ADO then it can ruin your week. The system ought to only trust me!
> >  Also, if there's a bug in shared library code, you have to upgrade every
> >application statically linked against it instead of just upgrading the
> >shared library.  Same deal for optimizations, like a 3dnow or altivec libjpeg
> >or something.
> Everything you say is 100% absolutely true. But it also has a price. For me 
> the price can be summed up like this.
> When there is a new version of postgres out I want to be able to type 
> apt-get update && apt-get upgrade and have it installed. Right now I can't 
> do that because debian has frozen on a well known and tested configuration 

 What about apt-get source --build postgres?  Doesn't that work?  Sure, it
takes a bit longer, but it's still automated.  You can list unstable
sources and stable binaries in sources.list

> which does not include postgres 7.1 In fact for all debian knows installing 
> postgres 7.1 may break other apps or cause library problems. In the end I 
> guess it's a tradeoff  but I can't help but wonder if there is some third 
> alternative. One that would let me keep the stable debian OS I have and 
> let's me install using apt the newest postgresql/php/apache that I have 
> come to rely on. Right now I have to manually compile the three most 
> important parts of my system which makes apt less useful.

 If apache is important for you, don't you want to custom-compile it anyway?
(maybe apache's a bad example, since their modules setup lets you do a lot
without recompiling...).  You can keep up to date on stuff you don't want to
bother with using apt, and build stuff you care about yourself.  (of course,
the best would be to have a system where you could get the latest versions
of the stuff you care about, but linked to the libs for the stable system.
There's no reason this couldn't happen, but it would make the debian archive
really big, because you'd need different versions of packages that were
linked against different libs.  It would get ugly, especially when package
maintainers got behind and didn't keep up with new libraries coming out.)

#define X(x,y) x##y
Peter Cordes ;  e-mail: X(peter@llama.nslug. , ns.ca)

"The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish the hours!
 Confound him, too, who in this place set up a sundial, to cut and hack
 my day so wretchedly into small pieces!" -- Plautus, 200 BCE

Reply to: