Re: Debian home page -> Download link broken:
On Mon 12 Jun 2023 at 19:26:41 (-0400), The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2023-06-12 at 18:55, David Wright wrote:
> > On Sun 11 Jun 2023 at 19:18:15 (-0400), The Wanderer wrote:
> >> On 2023-06-11 at 17:36, David Wright wrote:
>
> >>> There are several sources:
> >
> > [ snipped the back and forth ]
> >
> > I'm sorry, but I just can't take seriously your not being acquainted
> > with the term "release".
>
> Please don't put words in my mouth. Of course I'm familiar with that
> term. I just don't think of it when updating, perhaps in part because I
> update routinely when a release has not happened.
I was surprised; sorry to exaggerate.
> Either blocking updates which would change this information protects
> against something, or it doesn't.
>
> This is the only meaningful thing that I can think of that it could be
> protecting against, aside from cases where people didn't realize that
> what they were using was a symbolic name.
>
> If it does meaningfully protect against something that applies in my
> case, then I want to retain that protection. If it doesn't, then that's
> one less argument for why it should be done at all.
Perhaps one way to deal with this is to modify your earlier alias
suggestion to alias apt-get-change 'apt-get --allow-releaseinfo-change'
which has no effect during normal use, but allows you to circumvent
the problem when you next encounter the error message.
> I think this just reflects how wide the gap between the way you think
> about these things and the way I think about these things is.
I guess so; takes all sorts.
> As before, however, every time I've tried to put a reason why - or an
> alternate explanation of my perspective on this, which might make more
> sense - into words, I've run into some kind or another of wall.
>
> I suppose I should just stop trying to argue for my perspective on these
> mailing lists at all; I can't even remember the last time it went
> anywhere positive, or even necessarily didn't go somewhere unfortunate.
That would be disappointing; I read and keep many of your posts,
and would put misunderstandings down to the lack of nuance in emails,
as opposed to face-to-face conversations; I'd hate to cause any offence.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: