Miles Fidelman wrote:
Martin Read wrote:
On 01/11/14 01:53, lee wrote:
It doesn't need these code paths. The library doesn't do
anything unless you do have the software actually running which
the library makes useable --- at least that's what was said.
Of course, not all cases are the same, yet in this case, the
library shouldn't be installed unless the software it is for is
installed.
Gentoo and Funtoo are ----> over there, just like they were
months ago when you first started complaining about systemd on
debian-user.
If you move over to using them instead of Debian, you'll probably
be happier (because you'll have more control over what software
runs on your systems and how it's configured) and the Debian
maintainers will probably be happier (because there will be one
fewer person haranguing them for refusing to embrace
combinatorial explosion).
Everyone wins.
Right. This sounds more and more like "we're going to rewrite the
rules, and if you don't like it, we're taking our ball and going
home."
Various people have tried to explain how a binary distribution like
Debian works (build packages with all options included by defauls)
and how shared libraries work on Linux (all the libraries need to
be there to satisfy symbol resolution at run time, even if none of
the code is ever used). When those explanations fell on deaf ears,
people have resorted to analogy. That was clearly a waste of time
too.
These are standard "rules" that have existed for many years, there
is no rewriting going on at all. Instead, it seems there are people
who won't, or don't want to, understand explanations when given. For
people who claim to have technical backgrounds, that's a surprising
(and very frustrating) problem.