On Thu, 2013-08-29 at 00:11 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:48AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > Wow, thank you for the link. Than Ubuntu in the future will cause much > > > more issues, when you talk to upstream, than they already do by their > > ^^^^ Ubuntu and Debian > > > disgusting policy to split packages nowadays. > > It's not disgusting! > > > Reminds me to the running gag with the very often broken libjackd link > > in the past years. > > If you find a bug and don't report it, then it is not fair to "moan and > groan" about it.
Join the jackd devel mailing list archive. It's not that I had issues with a broken Debian package, since I build my own packages, it's about breaking something that does work when build from upstream, but not when maintainers split it to packages and confuse how to link libs. In the last years I guess Debian packages for jackd are ok, it's an example why split packages is disgusting. And I already pointed out, that it also has an advantage to split packages. My intend was to explain that Debian is a good distro, but no distro is the best distro, since it depends to the usage. However, I HAVE NOTHING MORE TO SAY. When you think that there is a best distro and all other distros are crap and if you think everything Debian does is even better than what upstream does, than you're free to believe this, it just not true. Btw. it's hard to file a bug to upstream when Debian is years behind stable releases from upstream, you only can ask the package maintainers to correct something, but AGAIN, 'm talking about something completely different. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1377693074.705.33.camel@archlinux