Hi. On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:11:01AM +0200, lee wrote: > Reco <recovery...@gmail.com> writes: > > > About the only thing that I'm missing here is why would anyone should > > compile anything on a production server, Xen's dom0 specifically (as it > > seems to be the main lee's concern). > > I didn't have a server back then --- and software to run on my computer > which worked fine until some change was made and it suddenly didn't work > anymore.
Curious. Can you remember the name of this software? > Package managers told me that the problem won't be fixed and > to install packages from experimental which wouldn't have solved the > problem and couldn't be installed without more or less upgrading my > system to experimental. They call it "multiarch", I call it brokenarch. > IIRC, that was before current stable was relased, and there was no > chance that the problem would be fixed with the next stable release. The description is somewhat vague, and I can only assume that it was one of those funny packages contained i386 binaries marked as _amd64 arch. And you manage to hit an exact moment of transition from (in)famous ia32-libs blob to the multiarch. Painful, but those things don't happen in stable. > Hence I needed a replacement for Debian and switched to Fedora. Leaving > users stranded like this is a big no and has destroyed 15+ years of > trust into Debian. > > Now they are planning to do something like that again by forcing systemd > upon their users, proving me right in what I've been thinking when they > suddenly enforced brokenarch: That something causing trouble to such an > extend is likely to cause further trouble sooner than later. Ok, ok. We all got it already. S*stemd in Debian = bad. S*stemd in Fedora = good. Fedora has no xen, hence = bad. Debian has xen, hence = good. Reco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140930135740.GA25948@x101h
