Instead of the developers learning to treat certain versions as separate
packages, the developers taught Portage how to handle and maintain several
versions of the same package though the use of SLOTs.
It goes on to explain further with an example, basically they have an
extra field
Very nice. Does anyone know how to get apt to give locally
compiled packages higher priority than official packages? I've been
playing with the release pinnings, but haven't gotten it to work.
Also, what apps do you think would make good benchmark cases for
showing how much is
* Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-11-29 10:27]:
But I use the website. Here's a questions. Go to eh redhat site and
see if you can figure out where to get a complete RedHat CD downloaded
from the net?
Uhm, should that have been a statement pro or contra to our page? I
found it
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 11:47:52AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
But I use the website. Here's a questions. Go to eh redhat site and
see if you can figure out where to get a complete RedHat CD downloaded
from the net?
Uhm, should that have been a statement pro or contra to our page? I
Gee, it's a pretty bad topic, but anyway...
On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 03:58:51PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
There's a straight 2 click path to a directory with an ISO image on it
on the gentoo site. For freebsd, it's 3 obvious clicks to a ftp site
directory, then click on arch and version. For
On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 06:58:56PM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
I'm with Joey on this; last time I tried to find Debian .iso images, it
was a nightmare. In fact I couldn't find an official woody iso anywhere.
This is the way of mirror operators to tell you that you should really
use jigdo
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 05:13:01PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Maybe the one in Austria, because it's the top of that list of mirrors.
(I thought it would be clear that Austria is at the top because the list is
sorted alphabetically... I am aware of the problem with people who click the
first link
Josip Rodin:
(I thought it would be clear that Austria is at the top because the list is
sorted alphabetically...
...in English. The list is still sorted with Austria first in all the
other pages, even when it makes little or no sense at all.
(my favourite example is of course the Swedish
On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 09:41:23PM +0100, Peter Karlsson wrote:
(I thought it would be clear that Austria is at the top because the list is
sorted alphabetically...
...in English. The list is still sorted with Austria first in all the
other pages, even when it makes little or no sense at
On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 03:58:51PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
and behind netbsd in the sory state of our cdrom mirror network.
I'm with Joey on this; last time I tried to find Debian .iso images, it
was a nightmare. In fact I couldn't find an official woody iso anywhere.
As he also said, many of
On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 04:58:30PM -0500, David B Harris wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 15:58:51 -0500
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The comparison is only fair with organizations that *want* you do do
so(so not redhat, probably not openbsd, or mandrake, or others whose
principal
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 11:23:23PM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
Joy (or any of the rest of the www team) - where do you get the data
to put into the mirror pages on www.d.o?
Well, we get it from the Internet :) Please rephrase the question, I don't
understand.
I'd suggest that a simple method
Nick Phillips wrote:
I'd suggest that a simple method for mirror admins to let us know what they
plan to mirror, and for us to test its availability on a regular basis,
would be a good idea.
(In fact I might even just do it).
I'm in the process of doing that, see the debian-cd list.
--
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002 23:27:33 +1300
Nick Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given the ISO mirroring situation? Care to elucidate?
There being an order of magnitude more package mirrors than ISO mirrors.
Completely ignoring the web site organisation, mind you, it's been
common for a long time for
David B Harris wrote:
There being an order of magnitude more package mirrors than ISO mirrors.
Completely ignoring the web site organisation, mind you, it's been
common for a long time for people to encourage network-based installs,
or anything other than downloading full 640M ISOs.
Part of
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002 16:06:40 -0500
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem with the net installs isos is mainly that they are
unofficial and there are several varying cd's produced by different
folks, and of varying quality (though quality is overall good; I've
used them happily in the
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 11:56:59AM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 11:23:23PM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
Joy (or any of the rest of the www team) - where do you get the data
to put into the mirror pages on www.d.o?
Well, we get it from the Internet :) Please rephrase the
On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 11:20:10AM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
Joy (or any of the rest of the www team) - where do you get the data
to put into the mirror pages on www.d.o?
Well, we get it from the Internet :) Please rephrase the question, I don't
understand.
Well, do the admins
* Joey Hess
| Of course debian-installer should support 1.4 mb net install floppies
| too.
s/should support/supports/
--
Tollef Fog Heen,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' :
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 04:06:40PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
The problem with the net installs isos is mainly that they are
unofficial and there are several varying cd's produced by different
folks, and of varying quality (though quality is overall good; I've used
Yeah. The i386 all work afaik, but
On Nov 30, Nick Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm with Joey on this; last time I tried to find Debian .iso images, it
was a nightmare. In fact I couldn't find an official woody iso anywhere.
This is the way of mirror operators to tell you that you should really
use jigdo or even better the
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 09:23:43PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Nov 30, Nick Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm with Joey on this; last time I tried to find Debian .iso images, it
was a nightmare. In fact I couldn't find an official woody iso anywhere.
This is the way of mirror
* Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-11-28 17:13]:
So maybe you click on the Debian on CD link, right? And from there on
the 4th bulletted link (Download CD images using HTTP or FTP), after
wading past unofficial minimal CD images, and learning what jigdo is.
Because those options are
Josip Rodin wrote:
Yes, there is. The debian-cd mirrors on our list are very diverse: some have
2.2r*, some have 3.0r*, some don't have full ISOs at all. Expecting
debian-www team to start making grossly hackish scripts to compensate for
whatever the hell people put in debian-cd/ directories
OK, howzabout some useful links that show that
although Debian may be losing some users, which is
still a shame, it perhaps not as bad as some would
think.
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=3614
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=24417
The first link shows a poll done a while ago
Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
And then on scroll way down the list to your country. And then into the
current directory on the mirror, oops, that was jigdo only?! back out
and to the 3.0r0 directory.
Uhm, just a second. When I click a on the links in that list I get to
the debian-cd directory
Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
But maybe instead, back at debian.org's front page, you picked the
Getting Debian link instead. Only to end up on a page that links to cd
vendors and downloading over the Internet. Ok, the latter. But it
points to a page that only lets one download unnofficial netinst
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Indeed, the Debian home page is so well organized and so easy to find
and get around in, that people don't *need* so many secondary sources
of information. Our success at doing our job well has meant that the
distrowatch
Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
But I use the website. Here's a questions. Go to eh redhat site and
see if you can figure out where to get a complete RedHat CD downloaded
from the net?
The comparison is only fair with organizations that *want* you do do so
(so not redhat, probably not openbsd,
Jon Kent wrote:
BTW, God I wish Debian had forums like this, far
easier that email lists (and no I can't set this up
before someone suggests it).
debianplanet.org has stuff like this (incidentially and only because I'm
stuck on the subject -- it's marginally easier to find a a debian cd
image
--- Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
debianplanet.org has stuff like this (incidentially
and only because I'm
yeh I know but not as easy to use as Gentoo's are
IMHO. BTW I agree with you regarding CD images. Gave
up in the end trying to download and order CDs from
Linux Emporium instead.
* (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
| But I use the website. Here's a questions. Go to eh redhat site and
| see if you can figure out where to get a complete RedHat CD downloaded
| from the net?
http://www.redhat.com - download - click the download link besides
«Red Hat Linux 8.0», and if it weren't for
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 15:58:51 -0500
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The comparison is only fair with organizations that *want* you do do
so(so not redhat, probably not openbsd, or mandrake, or others whose
principal developers try to sell cds).
Strictly speaking, given the ISO mirroring
Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Indeed, the Debian home page is so well organized and so easy to find
and get around in, that people don't *need* so many secondary sources
of information. Our success at doing our job well has meant that the
distrowatch counter is especially inaccurate in our
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 05:13:01PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
People report this to the web team all the time.
And every time they get a negative response, because we cannot fix something
that other people broke: the CD images distribution system. When woody was
released, the CD images were not
[ Could you please not CC me? ]
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 22:05, John Goerzen wrote:
Are you comparing released version to released version? (Debian stable to
NetBSD -STABLE?) If so, I stand corrected.
Yes.
In any case, we surely have come a long way.
Definitely!
* Joel Baker
| (I can think of one trivial example--devfs makes it really easy to tell
| which disks are available to the partitioning program. Can you describe
| a simple method to do that, which is guaranteed to work on any kernel?
| Likewise, can you describe a kernel-independent way of
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 07:05:31AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
* Joel Baker
| (I can think of one trivial example--devfs makes it really easy to tell
| which disks are available to the partitioning program. Can you describe
| a simple method to do that, which is guaranteed to work on
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:00:19AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
I might argue, in the case of APIs, that it is more a case of If you don't
have time to do it right, how will you ever have time to do it over - it
becomes *very* hard to un-entrench bad API choices, a lot of the time.
You might
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 09:05:25PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
Just waiting for Debian/VAX... ahem...
I have a couple of 100+ MHz machines available for autobuilding when
ready.. A 4000/600 and a 4000/700 from memory.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:58:25PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
--- Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently
viewed distribution pages
on distrowatch.com are:
I did say they were not great figures, just
interesting, but I expect this sort
* Joel Baker
| I might argue, in the case of APIs, that it is more a case of If you don't
| have time to do it right, how will you ever have time to do it over - it
| becomes *very* hard to un-entrench bad API choices, a lot of the time.
people seem to have the misconception that d-i is one big
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 13:59:48 -0500
H. S. Teoh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:41:21PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
[snip]
No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently viewed
distribution pages on distrowatch.com are:
1) Mandrake
2) Red Hat
3) Gentoo
4)
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:26:16PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
I must admit to some confusion, here. Should I take this as implying that
there is no particular intent to try to make Debian-Installer play nicely
on anything but Linux kernels?
Intent on whose part? You would need to ask those
Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Joel Baker
| I might argue, in the case of APIs, that it is more a case of If you don't
| have time to do it right, how will you ever have time to do it over - it
| becomes *very* hard to un-entrench bad API choices, a lot of the time.
people
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 08:46:01AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
I suppose I had something like that misconception. Where can I read
about the actaul construction of d-i?
http://cvs.debian.org/debian-installer/doc/
--
- mdz
Just for your statistics: I finally come back to beloved and wonderful
Debian after having fought for a few weeks with a Gentoo-Desktop system.
My conclusion was - or is - that even if Gentoo has newer packages
sometimes and is using more modern techniques in some areas (the new
dependancy-based
Right I'm more awake now, its was late a night went I
sent my last mail. A special thanks to Matt for his
reply ;-)
Right lets make this clear, I'm not here to push
Gentoo, I was originally responding to the original
question, is Debian losing users to Gentoo? Rather
than bother arguing the
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:48:15AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote:
But I have performed many debian installs with the boot floppy setup,
and I found that it still suffers from problems. One problem faced
by all dists is that of teaching people about partitioning and backing
up. At least the installer
* Jon Kent
| Now that we have X 4.2.1 in testing, maybe its a good
| time to do a point release? Get stable up to date, as
| testing is fairly up to date and seems stable at least
| on my boxes (x86). Radical thinking I know ;-)
we. don't. have. a. working. installer. for. sarge.
how hard is
--- Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we. don't. have. a. working. installer. for. sarge.
how hard is that to comprehend?
Thanks for the witty reply but thats why I suggested a
_point_ release, OK, its not the same as a major
release, comprehend!!! A point release is. not.
sarge.
* Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-11-26 11:59]:
| Now that we have X 4.2.1 in testing, maybe its a good
| time to do a point release? Get stable up to date, as
we. don't. have. a. working. installer. for. sarge.
* Jon Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-11-26 03:20]:
Thanks for the witty
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:08:54AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
Rather than bother arguing the point again, heres an interesting link:
http://www.distrowatch.com/stats.php?1#04
The shows that the top 4 Distributions are:
1) Mandrake
2) Red Hat
3) Gentoo
4) Debian
Well, here's another link:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:20:38AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
Thanks for the witty reply but thats why I suggested a
_point_ release, OK, its not the same as a major
release, comprehend!!! A point release is. not.
sarge.
A point release is on the way, check the facts dude.[1]
Michael
--
[1]
OK I have enough of this for the moment, do what you
feel is right but I'm not convinced that some of the
directions things are going are for the benefit of
Debian, the blinkers seem to well and truely attached
to some people.
To the people here who at least replied in a polite
manner, thanks,
* Jon Kent
| --- Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| we. don't. have. a. working. installer. for. sarge.
|
| how hard is that to comprehend?
|
| Thanks for the witty reply but thats why I suggested a
| _point_ release, OK, its not the same as a major
| release, comprehend!!!
--- Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
'Multiple exclamation marks,' he went on, shaking
his head, 'are
a sure sign of a diseased mind.'
(Terry Pratchett, Eric)
Indeed, or someone who trying to convey that they are
annoyed.
| A point release is. not. sarge.
stable does not
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:03:27AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
I want Debian to be a key player, not an underdog or
also ran, which some of you seem to be quite happy
with. This annoys the hell out of me, Debian was once
looked up to, now its the one with apt.
What does that mean, anyway? Does it
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:43:03PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
Certainly it will have a hard time working on any of the BSDs anytime soon,
if it relies on devfs more than trivially; they have no concept of it, nor
are they really likely to anytime soon.
Use of /proc should also, prefferably, be
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 05:20:56PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:48:10PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
Time, I'm afraid, is something I lack. Don't get me
wrong the work Branden has done is great, what I'm
trying to point out is that 4.2 is not in stable and,
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:24:14AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
| A point release is. not. sarge.
stable does not gain new versions. (with a few
exceptions, such as
where backporting security fixes is ~impossible.)
Are you sure? I seem to remember 2.2 getting a few
releases,
2.2r1 included
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:07:47PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:46:20PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
Debian's support for so many arches slows down development in other
areas as well. For example, getting gcc-3.2 working on all arches has [...]
the key issue. We
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:41:45PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
Something is seriously wrong, if a single bug that affects a single
arch can stop everyone else from forward. We need a way to get packages
that are broken on some platform into the distrubution while the
developers of the arch sort
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:41:45PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
Something is seriously wrong, if a single bug that affects a single
arch can stop everyone else from forward. We need a way to get packages
that are broken on some platform into the distrubution while the
developers of the arch sort
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:41:45PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:07:47PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:46:20PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
Debian's support for so many arches slows down development in other
areas as well. For example,
On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 22:46, Brian Nelson wrote:
What I fail to understand is why Debian insists on supporting every
single arch itself.
Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's
strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower.
But it's
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:46:20PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
Noah L. Meyerhans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 08:41:43PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
That's an interesting comparison. If you look at NetBSD, you'll see
that they have a very similar problem to us: They
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:39:41AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's
strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower.
But it's one thing that really differentiates Debian from the
competition. Being the
In chiark.mail.debian.devel, you wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:39:41AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's
strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower.
But it's one thing that really differentiates
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:08:54AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
http://www.distrowatch.com/stats.php?1#04
The shows that the top 4 Distributions are:
1) Mandrake
2) Red Hat
3) Gentoo
4) Debian
No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently viewed distribution pages
on distrowatch.com
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:41:21PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
[snip]
No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently viewed distribution pages
on distrowatch.com are:
1) Mandrake
2) Red Hat
3) Gentoo
4) Debian
And the sample size is approximately 56000 page views.
[snip]
And with
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 21:30:30 +1100
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:48:15AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote:
But I have performed many debian installs with the boot floppy setup,
and I found that it still suffers from problems. One problem faced
by all dists is
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:10:18AM -0500, Sean Proctor wrote:
[ snip ]
... Anyway, Gentoo has a much
different niche than Debian, so I don't understand why people are arguing
about changing Debian because of it. If Gentoo serves their needs better,
good. Perhaps Debian can then focus less on
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:08:54AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
http://www.distrowatch.com/stats.php?1#04
The shows that the top 4 Distributions are:
1) Mandrake
2) Red Hat
3) Gentoo
4) Debian
No, it doesn't. It shows that the most
Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's
strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower.
But it's one thing that really differentiates Debian from the
competition. Being the most portable Free OS
--- Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently
viewed distribution pages
on distrowatch.com are:
I did say they were not great figures, just
interesting, but I expect this sort of comment from
you.
If you had lived through a stable Debian
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:20:18AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:39:41AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's
strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower.
But it's one thing
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:04:48AM -0600, Zed Pobre wrote:
Something is seriously wrong, if a single bug that affects a single
arch can stop everyone else from forward.
You obviously didn't read all of aj's message. How about you postpone
your bitching along these lines until you've
Hello folks,
my answer to the subject: a few!
Dear everyone in the Debian community,
The question I want to pose today is Are we losing users to
Gentoo? I hate to sound like a marketing departmen drone, but I'm
becoming more and more disturbed since I'm noticing more and more
'random'
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:03:12AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:43:03PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
Certainly it will have a hard time working on any of the BSDs anytime soon,
if it relies on devfs more than trivially; they have no concept of it, nor
are they really
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:58:25PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
I did say they were not great figures, just interesting,
I don't see how these figures are interesting for debian development.
Could you please enlighten me?
Michael
--
The very first use of Unix in the 'real business' of Bell Labs was
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:58:25PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
--- Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently viewed distribution
pages on distrowatch.com are:
I did say they were not great figures, just interesting, but I expect this
sort of
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:20:40PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
In practice, I find that once such assumptions creep in, it can be very,
very hard to remove them without yanking out a lot of entrails to go with.
Which is the price to be paid for using a different kernel. An
installer, by its nature,
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:18:18PM +0100, Volker Dierks wrote:
Silly, perhaps, but it still conveys the message that the
Gentoo user is in control. Do the cutting edge enthusiasts in Debian
have the same amount of control? Have we become so complacent at
believing that since we have the
--- Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:58:25PM -0800, Jon Kent
wrote:
try to paint Debian as relatively unpopular. I
don't see what your
objective is, other than to start and prolong
pointless arguments.
What distrowatch tries to achieve is gauging
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:58:06PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:20:40PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
In practice, I find that once such assumptions creep in, it can be very,
very hard to remove them without yanking out a lot of entrails to go with.
Which is the price to
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:21:27PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
What distrowatch tries to achieve is gauging interesting in a distro,
Wouldn't it be gauging people going to distwatch to find a *different*
distro? I mean, why go to distwatch if you're happy with what you're
running and don't care about
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:26:16PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
I must admit to some confusion, here. Should I take this as implying that
there is no particular intent to try to make Debian-Installer play nicely
on anything but Linux kernels?
I'm saying that some things that an installer does are by
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 06:37:50PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:26:16PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
I must admit to some confusion, here. Should I take this as implying that
there is no particular intent to try to make Debian-Installer play nicely
on anything but Linux
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 12:20, John Goerzen wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:39:41AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's
strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower.
But it's one thing that really
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:07:51PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
In the origional message, I merely pointed out that keeping such things
properly encapsulated is crucial, if you EVER want to be able to run on any
other kernel.
Which original message? The one I saw said Certainly it will have a
hard
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:54:29PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:07:51PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
In the origional message, I merely pointed out that keeping such things
properly encapsulated is crucial, if you EVER want to be able to run on any
other kernel.
Which
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 07:22:53PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
But it's one thing that really differentiates Debian from the
competition. Being the most portable Free OS is worth something, in my
opinion.
I think NetBSD still has us beat on that point.
Debian runs on 11 distinct
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 07:45:09PM -0500, Clint Adams wrote:
Yeah, it's really a pity that we failed to convert mid-end ethernet cards
and mid-end machines into high-end harddisks, and it's so trivial, isn't
it?
I seem to remember at least two occasions where offers of the use of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 20 November 2002 9:50 am, Andrew Lau wrote:
[snip]
Whenever someone rants about Gentoo's processor optimisations
and states some overinflated performance boost such as 10%-20%, all I
can do is make a a feeble rebuttal stating
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 02:20:04AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote:
The fact I posted that Andrew Lau should see someone about his
disturbances comes about because of prior experience with that
particular person, and seeing that he seems to like stirring things
up and watching the result. He's done it
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 03:25:26AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote:
Other comments in that thread include comments like Hey, here's my
CFLAGS, ... ... why won't half my apps work now (including even
gcc now)? ... it might help you, george (and george says no, I
have a m68k and your CFLAGS has pentium
OK, I think I can add something to this little chain
mail as I use both Debian and Gentoo.
Why do I do that? Well, Debian is great and all and I
use it on servers etc, but on my workstation I want
alot more control that Debian can, or probably ever
can, give me. As an example, I don't want or
Jon Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
What we need to accept is there is a (percieved??)
problem, or problems, with Debian as it stands today,
these being (mainly)
Hard to install (rubbish obviously)
Out of date (this _is_ true)
Slow to update (this _is_ true)
Hard to configure
Hi,
Releases tend to be out of date. But that's a
feature: releases need to be composed of well tested
stable packages.
testing and unstable
have pretty up to date packages. So Debian is as up
to date as you
want; the caveat being that for newer software,
you'll need to put up
with
1 - 100 of 223 matches
Mail list logo
