slack2deb script and controversy

[Alan Eugene Davis <adavis@kuentos.guam.net>]

Thank you to all of the developers who have generously given of their
time to help several of my problems over the last three or four weeks.
I have made the point several times that I am only a user, and I have
hoped that my perspective might be accepted as such, at face value,
but perhaps I am still a somewhat sophisticated user.  I like to know
what is going on, I like to know about the nuts and bolts, even if I
cannot do anything about them.  This is one reason I have found free
software and Linux to be exciting and useful.  I have taken it upon
myself to educate myself about how Linux and unix work.  

I know that I don't understand it at the 10% level, but I can get this
system to do work for me; I couldn't do this if I had to depend on the 
savants to do all my bidding for me in setting up a turnkey system the
way  they want it to work.

Debian is superior to Slackware in many respects, but in terms of
packages, it is impoverished.  And in terms of sophistication of some
existing packages (say, color ls), it is behind.  Slackware is out of
contention, though, as far as being up to date, at least on the FTP
site.  Still, it is the default repository for both Linux
documentation (on which Debian has fallen seriously behind) and Linux
software is Sunsite.   

On basis of these two points---my attachment to Linux because I want
to know about nuts and bolts as well as my desire to pick and choose
from the range of available software---I express my thanks to the
several people who posted answers and a script to my and other
people's query about  the possibility  of a script to convert
Slackware to Debian.  And even though I see some of the points that
have been about "passports" to disaster, I will use this script as
necessary (quite liberally) to keep books on my system as I upgrade it
into something that, as I perceive, can serve me better .  I would
otherwise have had to install some packages by hand; I have 
already edited the script, to convert the doinst.sh scripts to
postinstall scripts, which works for simple links, at least; for more
complicated packages this will not be sufficient, but at the end, at
least other roots on this machine will be able to understand, I hope,
at least better, how to upgrade.  I realize that I will have to treat
each package individually; the script, far from being a weapon in my
hands, or a passport to tresspass onto hallowed debian ground, has
enabled me to do so more responsibly  

That a debian is more tightly integrated is obvious; it is lots
better, and it is up to date.  At least to one
who has upgraded to ELF it does not yet seem---granted many posted
warnings---that debian is yet painless to
upgrade.  (BTW, why isn't there a field, at least temporarily, in the
control files about ELF and aout status?).  On philosophical grounds,
I suggest that as the system grows more intricate, it will not grow
more bug free---or, certainly easier to use.  

Another point begs to be made:	 I see lack of central authority as an
advantage of Free Software: the source code must be made available.
I want the maximum freedom to set up my machine to do what I want, and
I want to know what debian is doing when it installs package: it must
be at least discoverable.   Isn't this just an extension of the GPL?

Just as many feel it is heresy to install a non-'valid debian'
package system upon a  debian system, I object to installation
software that does things to my system without taking me into
advisement.  Even if I am completely unschooled, even if I don't know
C from Shinola about the system, I want to be left to tweak my system
the way I want.  Even though, I might add, I want the scripts to work
correctly for users even less sophisticated than I am, and not leave
them in trouble.  Is there a middle ground?  

Perhaps a slackware to debian FAQ or HOWTO would clear up the air?

Sorry to express myself at such length, over a labor of love.  Debian
is better; openness will make it better still.   

Alan Davis