Re: [OT] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch hooks

[Andrew Suffield]

On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 01:12:01PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Suffield <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>     Andrew> "Can't learn, won't learn" -> "Don't care"
> 
> Nope.  That's the point of the *BSD example: I don't know
> /etc/makefiles/*.mk (or whatever it is from a pair of holes in the
> ground---but learning about those is a lot more attractive than
> learning enough about debbumf to get what I want done done.

Well, there's your problem. And well... it's *your* problem.

>     Andrew> Really, we don't. We're going to keep trying to get the
>     Andrew> best result we can; this necessitates that we do things in
>     Andrew> ways that other people don't.
> 
> It depends on whether you define "best result" as "fewest bug reports"
> or "most successful installs by potheads and other folks with the
> intelligence of a 5-year-old household appliance" or "happy hackers."

None of the above. Most reliable, effective system in intelligent
hands. I can't remember the last time there wasn't a "right" answer to
a given problem.

>     Andrew> [Your argument basically reduces to "Debian should do
>     Andrew> things in the manner I'm familiar with"]
> 
> Yup.  With a coefficient of importance somewhere between zero and one.
> Based on your "black/white" teleology, it has to be zero or one.  I'm
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Straw man.

> asking for something in the middle.  In particular, if it's gonna be
> evil, at least let it be a devil I know!

If that solution is inferior, tough.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature