Andrew Lentvorski wrote:
Michael O'Keefe wrote:
Now that Gus showed me what to look for, it is installed. Perhaps
the author took it for granted that every system should have it already?
On the other hand, it does take QUITE a bit of effort to test for
every contingency, and most hackers just say "it works on my system -
ship it!"
If it was commercial software and it behaved like that, yes you could
be mighty pissed. I wouldn't get so irate at a set of hackers that do
their best.
Uh, no. Sorry. That's not an excuse.
Linux needs to crawl out of its "works for me--tough for you" mentality.
While you can produce some useful stuff with it, you can't move to the
next level until you are willing to start applying some discipline and
some testing/QA.
I don't expect them to test on every system. I find that simply making
a Linux programmer install their program on FreeBSD is generally enough
to drive home my point.
The same standard is not applied to a Windows Shareware developer
compared to a commercial entity releasing software. If Johhny writes it
at home in his spare time, why should he put effort into making sure it
can be easily compiled on different distros or different *nix systems ?
He's doing it in his spare time, cut him some slack
--
Michael O'Keefe | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Live on and Ride an 06 BMW R12GS HP2 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] / |
I like less more or less less than |Work:+1 858 845 3514 / |
more. UNIX-live it,love it,fork() it |Fax :+1 858 845 2652 /_p_|
My views are MINE ALONE, blah, blah, |Home:+1 760 788 1296 \`O'|
blah, yackety yack - don't come back |Fax :+1 858 _/_\|_,
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
