Re: [OT] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch hooks

[Andrew Suffield]

On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 03:47:51PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Suffield <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>     >> Sure.  But how am I supposed to know it's _safe_?  Maybe
>     >> instead of diverting to /bin/true I should divert to
>     >> /bin/false?
> 
>     Andrew> Hell, I don't really know it's "safe" either. Try it and
>     Andrew> see? >:)
> 
>     Andrew> All it does is supposed to be to modify the apache config
>     Andrew> files, so splicing it out should just mean you'll have to
>     Andrew> fix your config files by hand.
> 
> The problem is that unless you're the Debian maintainer, you can't know
> if when that is bypassed you will end up with a later package wedged
> because it depends on Apache being _correctly_ reconfigured.

In this case, your problem has changed from "I don't want to use
apacheconfig" to "I want to use apacheconfig, I just don't want it to
break".

I think I'd file a bug if a package failed to install due to apache
being misconfigured, though.

>     Andrew> This sounds like a case where the right answer is "ask the
>     Andrew> mailing list and/or maintainers".
> 
> It would have taken more time to _find the mailing list address_ than
> I spent hacking the makefile.
> 
> That's what I don't like about the trend to "blackbox config tools":
> it encourages people like me to hack the parts we understand.  That's
> OK if it's just individuals, but I suspect this is an important reason
> why we Nipponjin suffer so much.  As a cultural matter, Japanese would
> rather have a local hack private to a small circle of initiates than
> spend effort on creating a (compatible) public good.

I'm not sure anybody can help you here. We can deal with "I'd like
feature X added", or even "How does Y work?", but I don't think
anybody can handle "I want to be able to do Z using only what I
already know". We *will* keep developing new tools that let us do
stuff better.

>     Andrew> It has been a goal that nobody should be forced to use
>     Andrew> hardware detection, so they aren't installed
>     Andrew> automatically.
> 
> So what you're saying is that Debian's goals are completely consonant
> with giving Branden's company a big advantage over vanilla Debian in
> ease of use?  (I know what your response will be, and it's completely
> adequate, of course.  Just sit there and feel the sting for a while,
> and see if that grows into a need to do something about this.  ;-)

Well, to point out the obvious, Progeny aren't in the
Debian-derivative game any more.

But in general... yes. The right answer here is to have several
variants on Debian which provide for different groups of
users. In a year or two we should have the infrastructure needed to
handle that within Debian proper; several subprojects are already
trying to make do with what we have now.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature