I ran into an interesting article today:

RPM Hell: A Perfect Example of Good Software Crippled by Bad Design

http://www.germane-software.com/~ser.../RPM_Hell.html

Slackware, of course, is immune to these problems...




--
Guy Macon, Electronics Engineer & Project Manager for hire.
Remember Doc Brown from the _Back to the Future_ movies? Do you
have an "impossible" engineering project that only someone like
Doc Brown can solve? My resume is at http://www.guymacon.com/

begin followup to Guy Macon:
> Slackware, of course, is immune to these problems...

1. Reason: Democracy is confusing. Slackware is not a democracy.
2. Reason: Packages without dependencies have no dependency problem.
3. Reason: Provide few packages, then users will build from source.

RPM hell is the result of users expecting windows-like setup.exe
and the reality of open /source/ software. Slackware is not a
solution to that.

IMHO the only working approach is that of debian/apt.

apt-get install some-cracy-package

And even here users manage to fuck up plenty by providing strange
sources to the dependency resolver. I wonder how the equivalent of
Fedora (called yum) will do.

--
Für Google, Tux und GPL!

Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote:

>
>
> I ran into an interesting article today:
>
> RPM Hell: A Perfect Example of Good Software Crippled by Bad Design
>
> http://www.germane-software.com/~ser.../RPM_Hell.html
>
> Slackware, of course, is immune to these problems...
>
>
>
>

1) No, because Slackware comes with RPM. Why anyone would use it I have no
clue, but it does come with RPM system.
2) Slackware's packages do not do dependency checking, which could be seen
as a flaw. I don't, but still....
3) You have been trolling around for a while. RPM is being worked on, and
is being fixed. You need to go to whatever RPM hell you believe in.

--
Get Revenge! Live long enough to be a problem for your children!

Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote:
> I ran into an interesting article today:
>
> RPM Hell: A Perfect Example of Good Software Crippled by Bad Design
>
> http://www.germane-software.com/~ser.../RPM_Hell.html
>
> Slackware, of course, is immune to these problems...

Yes, I think it is immune.

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 15:03:15 -0600, NeoSadist wrote:

> Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote:
>> [snip]
> 3) You have been trolling around for a while. RPM is being worked on, and
> is being fixed. You need to go to whatever RPM hell you believe in.

Maybe with a bit of luck you can join me in Neosadist's killfile. This
would be a good time for it. We're planning to grab some files out of
his $HOME, burn them, and roast marshmallows over the fire.
--
/dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net
or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply

/dev/rob0 wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 15:03:15 -0600, NeoSadist wrote:
>
>> Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote:
>>> [snip]
>> 3) You have been trolling around for a while. RPM is being worked on,
>> and
>> is being fixed. You need to go to whatever RPM hell you believe in.
>
> Maybe with a bit of luck you can join me in Neosadist's killfile. This
> would be a good time for it. We're planning to grab some files out of
> his $HOME, burn them, and roast marshmallows over the fire.

1) You're not in my killfile. I use KNode, so I'm trying to figure out
where the killfile is lol.
2) You're trolling, however. I never considered you a troll, but now I'm
wondering.
3) I'm never threatened lol. I could care less if you're going to try to
come after me. I've got security measures in place, but honestly, if you
can get in after I've hardened Slackware, I'll be looking at using FreeBSD
instead.

--
Our country has plenty of good five-cent cigars, but the trouble is
they charge fifteen cents for them.

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 20:59:31 +0000, Alexander Bartolich wrote:

>
> IMHO the only working approach is that of debian/apt.
>
> apt-get install some-cracy-package
>
> And even here users manage to fuck up plenty by providing strange
> sources to the dependency resolver. I wonder how the equivalent of
> Fedora (called yum) will do.

Sorry I have tried Debian & I don't subscribe to it's magical properties
claims.

--
Regards
garbage
garbagedisposal@despammed.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In alt.os.linux.slackware, NeoSadist dared to utter,
> 1) You're not in my killfile. I use KNode, so I'm trying to figure out
> where the killfile is lol.

To quote the Pope:
Knode is a Krappy Knewsreader for KDE.

> 2) You're trolling, however. I never considered you a troll, but now I'm
> wondering.

/dev/rob0 has never to my knowledge, ever, trolled by any definition of
the term. You owe him an apology.

> 3) I'm never threatened lol. I could care less if you're going to try to
> come after me. I've got security measures in place, but honestly, if you
> can get in after I've hardened Slackware, I'll be looking at using FreeBSD
> instead.

Dude learn to take a joke for what it is, a joke. First of all,
/dev/rob0's not the kinda guy to hold grudges. Second, even if he was
he's not the kinda guy to go after some one's $HOME directory. And
Third, even if he was both of those, he's not the kind of guy to lower
himself to that level over petty bickering.

And btw, FreeBSD is not that much more secure than Slackware, really.

- --
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAcVPPL3KiNGOqr6ERAikwAJ0XWiHE5Iay0mf0qTp1Eu F9EYGL2wCfRy48
NXUpmxuujkj9v6t6s4DoyrQ=
=skn7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <c4psvj$2lmv7f$1@ID-193444.news.uni-berlin.de>, Alexander Bartolich wrote:
>
> 2. Reason: Packages without dependencies have no dependency problem.

Slackware packages *do* have dependencies. They're simply not
built in to the package tool and/or the packages; they're for the
admin to discover (or not). As an example, if I install package
foo.tgz, which has a console-based binary and an X11-based binary,
but never installed the X11 packages, the console binary will still
work fine. Slackware's packaging system does solve this problem,
at least.

> 3. Reason: Provide few packages, then users will build from source.

Are you saying that Slackware provides few packages? If so, that's
fine; let folks build from source.

> RPM hell is the result of users expecting windows-like setup.exe
> and the reality of open /source/ software. Slackware is not a
> solution to that.

No, Slackware is not a solution to stupid Windows users expecting
setup.exe. I don't think it was intended to be; rather, it was (and
still is!) a solution to the problem of getting a linux kernel and
important binaries installed onto disk quickly and easily.

> IMHO the only working approach is that of debian/apt.
>
> apt-get install some-cracy-package
>
> And even here users manage to fuck up plenty by providing strange
> sources to the dependency resolver.

Okay, so apt-get doesn't solve the dependency hell problem, either.
What was your point again? ;-)

> I wonder how the equivalent of
> Fedora (called yum) will do.

I've used yum on YellowDog Linux, and I wasn't overwhelmed.

- --keith

- --
kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFAcYGshVcNCxZ5ID8RAhFHAJ4oCCivmNUrwEEdFA4bPP q7z9YLEgCgmhVu
59NPvX++aWL6Rvqx6dBvvUE=
=VRZi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[ replying to both posts in one, so it might be a bit unclear who I am
addressing at any given point ]

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 07:41:27 -0500, Alan Hicks wrote:

> In alt.os.linux.slackware, NeoSadist dared to utter,
>> 1) You're not in my killfile. I use KNode, so I'm trying to figure out

Oops, I guess I have to be careful what I say about you.

I thought I was KF'ed because I have on numerous occasions posted
additions and corrections to your posts, and they have been ignored. I
recall threads in c.o.l.security which definitely gave me that
impression; in fact I have said there that you had KF'ed me. Perhaps
you've got me KF'ed only in some newsgroups?

>> 2) You're trolling, however. I never considered you a troll, but now
>> I'm wondering.
>
> /dev/rob0 has never to my knowledge, ever, trolled by any definition of
> the term. You owe him an apology.

Now, now. Of course I have, and in this case Neosadist was right. Don't
you think it's a troll to make a semi-rude joke at someone's expense? And
isn't that what I was doing?

Mind you, IMV trolling isn't always a bad thing. Sometimes a good troll
can lead to a good thread.

>> 3) I'm never threatened lol. I could care less if you're going to try
>> to come after me. I've got security measures in place, but honestly,
>> if you can get in after I've hardened Slackware, I'll be looking at
>> using FreeBSD instead.

All OS's are equally vulnerable to this sort of attack, wherein the
attacker has been placed in one's Usenet killfile. You must be VERY
CAREFUL in choosing whom you allow such inside access, because no killfile
has a very secure lid or seal.

Try it yourself, you'll see. Make another user account, post something
in alt.test as that user, and then killfile that user. Switch hats to
be the KF'ed user again, and push open the lid of the KF from the
inside. Climb out and look around your $HOME. Scary, eh?

This is why I steadfastly refuse to KF Roger ("rm"); I'm afraid of his
31337 h4x0r 5k1LLz.

> Dude learn to take a joke for what it is, a joke. First of all,
> /dev/rob0's not the kinda guy to hold grudges. Second, even if he was

Thanks for sticking up for me, Alan, I appreciate it.
--
/dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net
or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply