Kevin Donnelly wrote: > On Wednesday 07 October 2009 09:19, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > >> There seems to be a bug in the 64 Studio repository. >> > > With respect, Ralf, this isn't true - Synfig starts OK here, and seems to run > OK. > > I think you're ignoring the advice given to you by a number of people on a > number of occasions in the past, namely - use the install as released, and > only make changes if you know in advance what the likely outcome will be.
Perhaps it's a problem of the packages. The Ubuntu version is fine, the 64 Studio one isn't, there's no package for the GUI. > If the install as released doesn't do what you want, then sorry - you have to > go back to Microsoft Windows or Apple Mac OSX; obviously Linux is not yet > sophisticated enough for your needs. > This sucks :( ... I started with Linux on the PC, I'm not from Windows or MacOS. > But if you decide to stick with Linux in spite of the shortcomings you have > identified, you shouldn't start making changes willy-nilly (eg weird things > like setting up chroots) - it then becomes impossible to know whether the > issue you face is present in the release, or (more likely) is due to your > tinkering, and in that case no-one on earth can tell you what you should do > to revert. > This sucks too :(. Chroot has no impact to Synfig, Fmit or any other buggy stuff, it might has impact to a auto-mount problem, but anyway note that I do changes level-headed. 64 Studio is a beta and that's why it's okay that there is a problem with the 64studio package, but this isn't because I install software to my 64 Studio or because I set up my machine to my needs, btw. similar changes had no bad effect when I did them on other distros ;). > So basically, you pays your money and you takes your choice - pay out for > proprietary stuff for its (for you) advanced features, or use what's given to > you in the 64Studio release, without chopping it up almost at random. In > *theory* the devs could do lots of work to deal with your issues, but for > *practical* reasons they are concentrating on getting a decent, stable distro > into the hands of average users. > > I don't like to be rude, No, for sure :D. > but I would like to see fewer postings from you > (especially the ones where you fire off an email and then follow it up with > two or three postscripts). I'm really not interested in hearing how someone > has buggered up his distro by making changes of his own devising - in my > view, since you have a great deal of audio expertise, your time would be far > better spent in taking the distro as released and writing some howtos or > tutorials for the software included. That would be a great help to everyone > who uses 64Studio. Constantly pestering developers, who have little enough > time as it is, is not really constructive. > > As an experiment, if you feel the need to reply to this, could you do it in > 10 > lines or less, in one email only, and then impose a self-denying ordinance on > yourself not to post to the list again for 7 days? > I don't orientate my life to the internet. I do read and write emails when I've got the time and the want to do it. 1. Linux is flexible, that's why people should be able to do changes. 2. For a beta there could be bugs and those bugs should be reported. Btw. I do have experiences with computers since around 20 years, this grotesque wars only exists for Linux, I never noticed this for QL, Commodore, Atari etc. ... Disgusting! I only speak well about 64 Studio, I'm not from Windows or MacOS. _______________________________________________ 64studio-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users
