The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.

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

Re: Can I interest anyone in RPM?



On Tue, Sep 23, 1997 at 09:35:00AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> I think we should at least explore the issue of using RPM/GLINT, etc.,
> as it's now become the clear standard packaging system for Linux - we

What's the use of a standard packaging system, if there are subtle
differences between the distributions using it? All the RPM-based
distribtions use a slighly different /etc/init.d-layout, may have different
package-names for the same packages, use different sonames for shared
libraries and so on.

Most distributions using RPM give their users the false impression that
they can install any RPM package, which is only true for very simple ones.
I think Debian's approach with a different packaging format and a tool like
alien that makes it obvious that the package you're installing wasn't
tested with the system you're installing it on is better.

> are almost the only holdout. I know it's not as powerful as
> dpkg/dselect, but it's powerful enough to get along and we can add what we
> need. We aren't really getting anywhere by going in our own direction,
> away from every other Linux, writing new software to duplicate what already
> exists.

What software does exist for RPM that we don't have? dpkg(1) seems to be a
rather good equivalent of rpm(1). We don't have a nice-looking X-based
frontend for it, but do we really want to have something like glint? glint
might look more attractive for the first-time user, but as the central
package-managment frontend it is way too simple-minded, IMHO. If you look
at the UI draft for deity, you'll notice that much more thought has gone
into its design. Yes, it's not available right now, but I'm pretty sure
switching to RPM would take much longer than waiting for deity.

> The last time I brought this up, perhaps a year ago, it started an
> awful flame-war. This time I'd like all of the developers to seriously
> consider it.

If you wanted to avoid a flame-war this time, you probably should have
chosen a better time instead starting this thread a few hours after your
flame-war with the deity folks.

> I don't think Debian is its packaging system. Debian is the open development
> paradigm, the volunteers, and the committment to free software. What we use
> to package that software is irrelevant.

So when it's irrelevant, why should we switch to RPM? I couldn't find any
convincing arguments in your message.

Martin
-- 
/* Martin Buck                      E-Mail: martin-2.buck@student.uni-ulm.de */
/* Student of electrical engineering   WWW: http://www.uni-ulm.de/~s_mbuck1/ */
/* University of Ulm, Germany  Snail-Mail: Paukengasse 2, 89077 Ulm, Germany */
#include <disclaimer.h>            /* PGP Key available    MIME-Mail welcome */


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .