Post #178,349
10/7/04 9:29:44 PM
|
Unless I'm missing something......
As long as all dependencies are satisfied, and I'm too lazy to remove something that isn't used, why should I care?
.... couldn't that same argument be made of a stock kernel? Where's the difference?
|
Post #178,353
10/7/04 10:26:21 PM
|
Re: Unless I'm missing something......
perhaps package b has depends on the old libs, then doc's idea has merit regards, daemon
|
Post #178,428
10/8/04 9:55:30 AM
|
Did you read
The scenario I pointed out?
Do you understand?
No, I am not being obtuse.
I specififed all that.
My point is Ross can't/won't do anything saving time, even to save his life.
-- [link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg], [link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwetheyNo matter how much Microsoft supporters whine about how Linux and other operating systems have just as many bugs as their operating systems do, the bottom line is that the serious, gut-wrenching problems happen on Windows, not on Linux, not on Mac OS. -- [link|http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1622086,00.asp|source]Here is an example: [link|http://www.greymagic.com/security/advisories/gm001-ie/|Executing arbitrary commands without Active Scripting or ActiveX when using Windows]
|
Post #178,356
10/7/04 10:47:15 PM
|
Re: Unless I'm missing something......
It's a discipline thing. First, I don't have useless libraries on my system. fooker's scenario doesn't arise on my machine - everything "in play" is real. Second - I could delete a lot of stuff I don't use. But I know everything in /lib/modules/2.4.20 is real, and everything in /usr/src/linux/.config is exactly tailored to my own system. Sure, I could just go in an check all the modules I'll never need, but it's almost an artistic value to have the software guts exactly match the hardware. Unlike Windows, I have the beautiful possibility of making an OS that exactly matches in every detail my own hardware.
Another point - the modules issue is secondary to compiling for my exact processor, power management, file systems, and network role. Only because I slogged through the entire thing do I know what is what. It was worth it just to learn the kernel. As a result, I can easily build my own system from scratch if needed. If something goes wrong, I'll be able to track it down immediately.
Hey, why do you still do OS/2? "Because it's a tight, beautiful solution" right?
I think I get pissed at the mob mentality because it belittles the idea of hard-won beauty in favor of lazy expediency. This attitude is eventually ruinous of everything it touches.
-drl
|
Post #178,387
10/8/04 3:23:23 AM
|
Re Re Wind
And the crowd said, "Bo Selecta".
You're talking nonsense. Because you upgrade with an automated tool that is guaranteed to not remove superfluous libraries, you're pretty much guaranteed to end up with stale, unused libraries on your system.
How do you GUARANTEE that such a such a situation does not occur in your oh-so-tight system?
Oh, balls to this.
You can't. That's it; it's that simple. There's no tool for doing this on RPM-based Linux distributions. It's down to you going "rpm -qa", parsing the results, and figuring it out for yourself.
On the other hand, there is a tool for doing this on Debian-based distributions; it's called "deborphan" and it removes libraries and packages (as you see fit, natch) that nothing depends on.
In fact, in order to ensure that one's system remains "tight" (whatever the hell that means - on the one hand, you're spectacularly anal about what kernel modules are available, on the other you don't appear to give a shit what's strewn about the filesystem) there's an even better tool - "debfoster". debfoster removes packages and everything that they and they alone depend on. I'd have thought such things would appeal to your silly sense of "tightness", but now that you've backed yourself into the "Debian is shit! I think it, therefore it's true!" corner, you'll never be able to use them (at least, and admit it).
Peter [link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire] [link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal] [link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #178,393
10/8/04 6:11:54 AM
|
Ok, that's nice
Why can't I download that and run it on my machine? Sounds pretty standalone.
Remember "repeats.com" for DOS?
-drl
|
Post #178,403
10/8/04 7:37:50 AM
|
Good luck with that.
Knock yourself out:
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org/code/|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org/code/]
It won't work out of the box, though. You need dpkg.
Peter [link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire] [link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal] [link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #178,407
10/8/04 8:26:30 AM
|
Can I alter it for RPM?
-drl
|
Post #178,411
10/8/04 8:47:45 AM
|
I dunno. Can you?
It's GPL software, if that's what you're asking.
Making it work with RPM-based systems is a Small Matter Of Programming.
Peter [link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire] [link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal] [link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #178,419
10/8/04 9:28:44 AM
|
BTW....
I have let this go one to long: MY NAME IS: FOLKERT Get it right. Not "fooker".
-- [link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg], [link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwetheyNo matter how much Microsoft supporters whine about how Linux and other operating systems have just as many bugs as their operating systems do, the bottom line is that the serious, gut-wrenching problems happen on Windows, not on Linux, not on Mac OS. -- [link|http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1622086,00.asp|source]Here is an example: [link|http://www.greymagic.com/security/advisories/gm001-ie/|Executing arbitrary commands without Active Scripting or ActiveX when using Windows]
|
Post #178,435
10/8/04 11:23:38 AM
|
Always wondered: is the "L" silent as in "folk"? Guessing no
|
Post #178,451
10/8/04 12:12:27 PM
|
As in:
Foal-curt
-- [link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg], [link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwetheyNo matter how much Microsoft supporters whine about how Linux and other operating systems have just as many bugs as their operating systems do, the bottom line is that the serious, gut-wrenching problems happen on Windows, not on Linux, not on Mac OS. -- [link|http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1622086,00.asp|source]Here is an example: [link|http://www.greymagic.com/security/advisories/gm001-ie/|Executing arbitrary commands without Active Scripting or ActiveX when using Windows]
|
Post #178,461
10/8/04 12:54:31 PM
|
Re: BTW....
Term of respect, but since your so pissy...fine.
-drl
|
Post #178,478
10/8/04 2:47:32 PM
|
His so pissy what?
Illiterate colonial baboon.
Peter [link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire] [link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal] [link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #178,524
10/8/04 7:00:06 PM
|
HEY!!
Illiterate colonial baboon.
That's illiterate colonial wanker. Leave us colonial baboons out of it, thank you very much! ;-)
|
Post #178,562
10/8/04 11:28:06 PM
|
Yeah, you pasty skinned photon trap!
-drl
|
Post #178,422
10/8/04 9:37:29 AM
|
Okay then... another thing
Let us just say you have everything on your machine you want, nothing more. Except it is getting rather slow for your liking.
How would you transfer your setup *COMPLETELY* grabbing every setting and nuance, using your kernel method, to a much newer machine?
Ask Drew how we did his work machine. From a pissy 300MHz machine that was WAY overstrapped, but setup exactly the way he wanted(apache, php, custom sites etc...), to a much nicer and more resource rich 1GHz machine.
-- [link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg], [link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwetheyNo matter how much Microsoft supporters whine about how Linux and other operating systems have just as many bugs as their operating systems do, the bottom line is that the serious, gut-wrenching problems happen on Windows, not on Linux, not on Mac OS. -- [link|http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1622086,00.asp|source]Here is an example: [link|http://www.greymagic.com/security/advisories/gm001-ie/|Executing arbitrary commands without Active Scripting or ActiveX when using Windows]
|
Post #178,423
10/8/04 9:38:40 AM
|
Re: Okay then... another thing
I'd never "transfer" a system. What is this, DOS?
I'd make a freshie and move my data over.
-drl
|
Post #178,426
10/8/04 9:49:01 AM
|
Eaxctly the point I was trying to make.
You make effort to reduce your wheel spinning.
I have the same Installation at home for my XP3200+ as I had for my Pentium 200MMX.
THIS is why you cannot comprehend Debian. "Freshie" isn't really a good idea.
Debian is all about maintaining what you have and bringing it forward to help you get on with much more profitable things to do.
Without "going into installation mode, booting from CD", can you Upgrade your system from one version of SuSE to another? Remember while still providing services? Without restarting the machine? Without really breaking anything? (maybe a few things got changed and have to be manually edited to comply with the new methods)
How about that. Drew never even noticed the change. His passwords worked, the apache setup worked, etc... I'd be willing to bet you couldn't build a freshie and have it backup with ALL services within an hour, not breaking ANYTHING or forgetting something.
-- [link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg], [link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwetheyNo matter how much Microsoft supporters whine about how Linux and other operating systems have just as many bugs as their operating systems do, the bottom line is that the serious, gut-wrenching problems happen on Windows, not on Linux, not on Mac OS. -- [link|http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1622086,00.asp|source]Here is an example: [link|http://www.greymagic.com/security/advisories/gm001-ie/|Executing arbitrary commands without Active Scripting or ActiveX when using Windows]
|