jam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Saturday 31 May 2008 10:00:04 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >> OK.. looks like a complete install, track down all the bits and pieces
>> >> and hopefully not miss anything.
>> >>
>> >> Luckily I'm reasonably consistent where I put things, so it's just going
>> >> to be a long slow process.
>> >>
>> >> In a perfect world, apt-get would do everything but in practice it
>> >> doesn't :(
>> >
>> > So you can try to narrow the gap between "perfect" and "current" by
>> > trying to create packages for the software you write.
>>
>> It is also helpful to try and avoid building your own custom packages as
>> much as possible. In many cases alternatives exist, or waiting for an
>> upgrade has a longer cost.
(Ahem. I meant "lower" rather than "longer" there. :l)
> Might as well use winders. Seriously - is not THIS what the whole
> linux thing is all about.
Well, from where I set: no. Linux is about getting useful and
productive things done. This is true in business, and in my personal
life, and is true (I think) for many of the people out there.[1]
> You don't NEED to, but if you want to ... Have fun! This is what it's
> all about.
I have no objection to people who want to build their own packages, but
I think it is generally a mistake, and they are generally poorly advised
to do so.
As asked elsewhere, why?
Because building your own packages is a huge commitment. It sounds
temptingly easy, but it really isn't -- and most of that cost comes
*after* you build the package and install it.
Having done this you are faced with needing to do integration and
testing for the system when you upgrade, because you have a special
unique snowflake of a system that isn't like anything else out there.
Your distribution puts in hundreds of person-hours a year, and ofter
(much) more, testing updates to make sure they just work. On your
system that is no longer valid -- your custom package can throw a
spanner in the works, and /you/ better know how to get it back out.
You suddenly have to be your own security team: keep up to date on
security issues for your package, and anything it depends on, and update
your own package when something happens.
Without that commitment you well, eventually, get to join the legions of
poorly maintained, compromised Linux boxes out there. This hurts
everyone, but especially you -- potentially legally, certainly in terms
of a lot of work when your ISP (or the police) call up about all that
SPAM you have been sending out or those warez you are distributing...
You might face a steep learning curve when you want to deploy a new
system: the world moved on, and your application isn't available on the
platform because it was obsolete some time ago. So, either build it
again yourself or face learning the new "standard" now. Either way, not
fun to suddenly have thrust on you -- especially if it is for security
reasons.
Finally, building and maintaining a package costs you. You have to
spend a /lot/ of time on it, which you could be using to do something
productive. Heck, even a couple of hours is notable...
I don't know about you, but I never have enough free time to do
everything I want to get done. ;)
Regards,
Daniel
Footnotes:
[1] Specifically, as Linux becomes more "mainstream" this becomes more
true, because it moves outside the "geek" origins of the platform.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
