Re: Where is "/etc/rc.d/rc.local" on Debian?
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> > > The point being, do NOT assume that the person trying to load the orignial
> > > Red Hat package even knows what a Makefile is.
> > If he manages to understand how to convert an rpm to a tarball, he will surely
> > understand how to use alien to make a .deb package, and will be smart enough
> > to understand the process.
>
>
> Marek, I think George's point is Joe Blow doesn't *have* to
> understand using alien to convert a .rpm to a .deb, alien does
> everything for him. The problem starts when the newly created
> .deb still fails to work because of assumptions about the layout
> of the distro made by the creators of the .rpm.
Ok, I agree. I feel I have to explain myself a little bit. Working for an ISP,
I have contact with many people working on Winblows-equipped machines. Those
people have accounts on our Linux machines and when faced with the necessity
to actually read some documentation, they are completely shocked one HAS to
learn something! Winblows created a generation of totally ignorant "power
users" of PCs - M$ policy is to free people from thinking by creating software
which does almost everything for the user - either automatically or by
dictating all the steps required to achieve some goal. It may seem it is good
- an average user doesn't have to master obscure techniques to manage his data
and do his work, but what happens if the "infallible" Micro$oft software
reveals another "undocumented feature" (a.k.a "a bug" :-)))? Our "power user"
proud of his knowledge opens wide his eyes, stares at the Big Blue Screen(tm)
with disbelief in his eyes and finally dials the M$ support number (where he
will learn nothing new...). And the sad thing is that usually the problem is
quite obvious, easy to fix or work around - solution is at hand, but Joe Blow
hasn't been taught how to THINK when using a computer - he'd been given a
piece of software that CLAIMS it doesn't require ANY knowledge to use it, that
is supposed to work for ever and ever. Amen. Unfortunately, the software kicks
back at our Joe and he knows nothing about how to win that game, he has NO
resources (of some value) when he can read about the problem, even more - he
thinks the software is so perfect he doesn't need to know ANYTHING about it -
it will work, period... If he was told: "Joe, the software will work in most
cases, but should it fail you have the documentation, right there, use this or
that command to read it, it's nothing hard, just a few tips - you will save
time and money by fixing most of the problems on your own" I'm sure he'd
manage the situation...
So, I think the way to go is NOT TO DO EVERYTHING FOR THE USER, but to GIVE
ADVICE, EXPLAIN, HELP and MAKE THEM THINK a little bit about what's happening
in their computer. Unix has never been and, I hope, it will never be an
operating system that frees people from thinking...
> I've said this before and I'll say it again here: alien does
> *NOT* solve the problem of an absence of a 'standard' for Linux
> distros.
Is such a standard possible at all? I mean, not on a paper - they already
exist, after all, but is it possible that RH, Debian and other dist vendors
will ever come to some agreement? It doesn't show on the surface, but there's
a war raging under the cover - some want to provide GOOD products, but some
just want to make money... Sad but true...
marek
Reply to: