Quoting Hendrik Boom (hend...@topoi.pooq.com): > Once again, it is a matter of trust, not technical content. Do you > trust the maintainers of libsystemd0 not to entangle it with unwanted > systemd-isms? You evidently do. Rainer does not.
I'm certainly willing to consider the possibility that the upstream coders are evil _and_ the package maintainers are evil _and_ that nobody I read including the entire brain trust of LWN.net can figure that out and tell me. If those two extremely coincidentally evil parties collaborate _and_ everyone completely fails to notice, then I'm indeed in trouble. If those two extremely coincidentally evil parties collaborate and someone _does_ notice, then I'll be replacing libsystemd0 with an 'equivs' recipe about two minutes later. Incidentally, if both extremely coincidentally evil parties collaborate and nobody notices, I am probably in trouble on far more significant matters than libsystemd0, and I'd have extremely just cause to start getting deeply paranoid about every single one of the... $ dpkg -l | grep '^ii' | wc -l 685 $ ...685 package on my server, all of which would suddenly become very threatening. If your point is merely that one ends up bestowing (conditional) trust onto the developers of all distro packages one runs, that is true but banal and obvious. If you wish to assert that I have some particular and pronounced reason I should distrust a distro packager of libssytemd0 _and_ that the entire Linux community would utterly fail to notice this betrayal, I have yet to hear it, and wait with polite anticipation (but I'm not holding my breath waiting). By the way, what specifically does 'entangle it with unwanted systemd-isms' actually _mean_, and what does that have to do with whatever-the-heck-it-was that Rainier said? Once again, it seems to me, there's vagueness in unfortunate parts of this narrative. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng