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

Re: Debian from the Stampede's POV



On Sat, May 23, 1998 at 12:33:15PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> >The .deb is proprietary to Debian.  =3Dp  The installation and removal scri=
> 
>     Any particular reason you have Quoted Printable on?

Not really.  Other than that it's the default and is more or less considered
standard so I left it that way.


> >Do you remember a release of bash that made it in to unstable not long ago?=
> 
>     No.  I dislike bash and don't use it.

Whelp, it kinda broke all of Debian because while YOU don't use it, the
system doesn't work without it and a working copy must be present.


> >In the same circumstances, would I have been able to do that with a slp
> >file?  Likely not.  Probably not.
> 
>     And neither you or I can answer that question.  I have found out what the
> problem with this thread is.  Most people are taking it as a religious
> affront.  Look, use whatever slings your dingy, alright?  But let's keep a
> few things grounded in fact.

I did look at the package format.  I did see how the info was handled.  I
did see that what I have come to take for granted when working with normal
tarballs and with .deb files didn't work.  However, I can't see how someone
who prefers a tar-based system would want to give up that ability to patch
the info the package manager uses either.


> 1: SLP is beta, as is the rest of Stampede.  How fun was DEB in its infancy. 
> IIRC DEB was not always an ar archive of tars.

I've not been around all that long.


> 2: What I am talking about is the ideal that SLP presents, not the technical
> nitty gritty.  Take that elsewhere.  If you want to argue technical nitty
> gritty let's remember that I am on the Debian mailing list because, guess
> what, I *RUN* Debian.  I guess that means, at the core of it, on the day to
> day operations, I must agree with the format, huh?

This thread is on debian-devel so the technical nitty-gritty seems kinda
relevant here.  This is my fault and I am sorry everyone.  I originally
posted a reply early on in this thread also to debian-user because at the
time the thread seemed more appropriate.  It's ended up crossposted since
and has gotten AFAIC more technical.


> 3: No one should ever get so religious about any topic that they are
> automatically closed to new ideas and ideals.  No one.  

I like the idea of tar vs. ar.  I just don't like binary appended data to
the tar file because I can't make use of it there without special tools. 
That's what turned me from rpm.

Attachment: pgpiZ9kYpsyjh.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: