-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 02 December 2002 11:19, Kevin Anderson wrote:
> Is it faster to wait for an RPM package, or an emerge script? I'll give
RPM. what's your point?
> you a hint. I could write an install script, and almost anyone on this
> list could read one.
that's nice. i can write an RPM SPEC file and most could read it, but i don't
have to.
> Verified, Tested, Integrated and certified like MKD9 which you recommended
> against because it doesn't install, and can't run on the person's box?
*laughs* wow, nice one. so because there was a particular hardware problem
with one particular version of one particular distribution, it means that
verifying and integrating binary software applications isn't a meaningful
advantage.
what a load of crap.
most linux systems have thousands of discrete bits of software that
interoperate with each other on many levels (libraries, IPC, network comm,
local file manip as in "configuration files"). these interactions can be
complex and even non-obvious. depending on how you build those various pieces
of software can determine how [well | if] they work with each other. the
rest should be obvious from there ...
> Sorry, RPM has it's weaknesses, apt-get has it's weaknesses, emerge has
> it's weaknesses. They all do. Using a precompiled binary does not assure
> you of anything.
for the last time kevin: i'm not talking about delivery (rpm, apt, emerge,
ports) i'm talking about source vs binary. you are having a hard time
differentiating between those concepts, i understand, but they are different.
you could deliver all your source via RPM and tweak & build from there, or
you could deliver all your binaries via emerge. that isn't the point at all.
> Would you install something onto a production box without testing it first?
i test the configurations and put it under load, yes. fortunately i don't have
to do anything else because all the rest of the integration needs and
requirements are taken care of for me by the distribution company i bought it
from.
> I test everything before it goes into production. Therefore, actually
> emerging the app doesn't worry me, because I know it will compile
> correctly, and install in my environment. I've already done it in test.
wow, you either have no idea what software integration testing involves or you
spend a LOT of time verifying your builds. i'm guessing the former.
maybe it doesn't matter to you, maybe it works "good enough" for you... great.
but let me use an anology: just beause you haven't been killed not wearing a
seat belt yet doesn't mean that someone else may be smarter because they wear
a seat belt in preperation for a crash. it also doesn't mean that seat belts
don't save lives.
i deffinitely believe that gentoo works for you. but that doesn't mean it's a
smart way to go in general.
> %. What it does is give me the assurance that if I give someone a burnt CD
> and they hum and haw about installing it for 6 months or a year. When they
you do know that you can do a network install of just about any distro out
there, right?
> Having said that, I wouldn't advise Gentoo to a newbie.
which nullifies the "giving a CD to a new person" concept.
- --
Aaron J. Seigo
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler"
- Albert Einstein
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE966+k1rcusafx20MRAjfFAJ9R1c2W0sdGYtuzopfxjUyYyRJSjwCfRnN8
7HR2J1c1KzP71H6nH/EBo00=
=+QLl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
