Re: systemd-free alternatives are not off topic.
On 11/24/2014 12:37 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> On 25/11/14 03:26, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> On 11/24/2014 10:52 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>>> On 25/11/14 01:57, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>> On 11/24/2014 8:54 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>>>>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/24/2014 2:56 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote: <snip>
> <snipped>
>>>>
>>>> Do you expect customers to build .deb files for every piece of
>>>> software they create?
>>>
>>> No, I expect the admin to 'try' and do that (e.g. checkinstall) or
>>> install the upstream package to the appropriate place where it *will*
>>> withstand upgrade. But not everyone follows BP (e.g. ITIL, PCI, and
>>> whatever relevant guidelines apply to their use-case). I don't know what
>>> your use-case is...
>>>
>>
>> These are system admins who have either started with Unix in the 1980's,
>> or people who learned from those sysadmins. Back then you did put stuff
>> in /bin and/or /sbin, for instance. And the company is not changing.
>
> Good luck with that (whoever you really are). The triumph of optimism
> over experience will no doubt be one hell of a party. Shame I'll likely
> not have an invite.
> Historically "Overcome (difficulties) and Adapt (to change)" works for
> survivors.
>
It is me. But once again you start with the attacks.
>>
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't happen - and is not going to happen. It's much faster
>>>
>>> Convenience is the antipathy of security? (security also mean reliability).
>>>
>>
>> It is reliable.
>
> Imagine that I used a time machine to make the same point previously
> (whoever you really are).
>
It is me. But once again you start with the attacks.
>> And has been for many years. That's what testing is
>> all about.
>
> Apropos of what? You (whoever you are) shouldn't be running Testing if
> you want stability (Stable). I'm unable to conceive of how any minimally
> qualified "Veteran UNIX Administrator" doesn't "get that" (though
> admittedly I have been accused of lacking imagination).
>
> Please stop shifting goal posts - you'll not only hurt your back but
> also blow your cover.
>
Who said anything about running testing? Not I.
Testing is installing software and ensuring it works correctly. It has
nothing to do with a Debian distribution called "testing" (although the
reason for the distribution is to perform testing).
>>
>> And even if they did create .deb files for everything, that would not
>> negate the need for testing.
>
> Agreed - I'm glad you (who ever you are) have finally grasped some of
> the basics of the "Debian Way", and also, basic "change control". My
> only question is - what is your point? (aside from argument for the sake
> of argument).
>
It is me. But once again you start with the attacks.
And I DO understand the "Debian Way". So do my customers. However,
they don't make .deb files for the custom software they install. They
don't feel a need to. And it's their system - it's their choice.
> I am pleased that some to what I've said earlier has helped your
> understanding - it somewhat compensates for my time.
>
> <snipped>
>
> Yours in Debian solidarity.
>
>
You have helped with nothing. All you've done is dismiss facts and
attack because those facts don't meet YOUR requirements.
Jerry
Reply to: