[gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

Hi folks,

just as I thought, certain folks had their lessons now it's 
maybe worth contributing someting, it starts again: 
Critical bugs are simply declared invalid. 

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=180935

Again the old philosophy "what I don't understand is invalid".

Obviously my contributions are unwelcomed, so I closed the bug.

BTW, I've already fixed it. If anyone's *seriously* interested,
give a note. Evrything else is a waste of my time.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Dienstag, 5. Juni 2007, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> just as I thought, certain folks had their lessons now it's
> maybe worth contributing someting, it starts again:
> Critical bugs are simply declared invalid.
>
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=180935
>
> Again the old philosophy "what I don't understand is invalid".
>
> Obviously my contributions are unwelcomed, so I closed the bug.
>
> BTW, I've already fixed it. If anyone's *seriously* interested,
> give a note. Evrything else is a waste of my time.
>

so first you went to the wrong bugzilla and made a big fuss.

Then you went to the gentoo-bugzilla and made even more fuss.

And in less than a day you have concluded that nobody is interessted in your 
problem or patch.

You are really fast - but have you ever tried to create a NEW PROFILE WITH THE 
CORRECT DIR INSTEAD OF SYMLINKS? NO?

So why are you complaining?

Just start firefox with firefox -Profilemanager

Oh, and retry. Maybe adding the author of mozilla-launcher to the bug? 
Because, you know, the bugwranglers aren't perfect-all-knowing persons - and 
you are so smart, you should be able to find the dev who is responsible for 
mozilla-launcher...

For the rest - a typical Enrico-mail. Please don't stop. Go on, nothing to see 
here.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 17:07:42 +0200
Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> just as I thought, certain folks had their lessons now it's 
> maybe worth contributing someting, it starts again: 
> Critical bugs are simply declared invalid. 
> 
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=180935
> 
> Again the old philosophy "what I don't understand is invalid".
> 
> Obviously my contributions are unwelcomed, so I closed the bug.
> 
> BTW, I've already fixed it. If anyone's *seriously* interested,
> give a note. Evrything else is a waste of my time.

Well, since your awesome efforts last time, everyone here already knows
you're the most polite bug reporter, absolutely fair and waiting long
enough for the bug wranglers to catch up, answering nicely to their
statements and that you're always correct. Your solution to that bug
was charming and short: Dump what you didn't see making sense (is that
what you said about things being "invalid"?) -- instead of complicated
solutions like e.g. using readlink(1) and keeping at least the
functionality in there.

-hwh

PS: free sarcasm for everyone, just pick your favorite above. And sorry
for adding to the inevitable noise.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[felix]

I see complaints about the bug reporting style, but no mea culpas.  I
had an experience with gentoo bugs recently which confirms his
experience on a smaller level.  The apache ebuilds used to recognize
USERDIR to override the default "public_html" value.  The 2.4 ebuilds
discarded that for no reason.  I filed a bug which was promptly closed
for no good reason, only the bogus answer that the new configuraion
files layout took care of it.  I reopened it with a more detailed
description of the problem and included the URL of the apache
documentation which explains that the suexec binary has to be compiled
with the USERDIR values known at compile time.  A week later, the bug
was properly closed with a better solution than the old 2.2 solution,
and a more permanent solution than my home grown work around.

Some may remember me from whining a month or two ago about the
atrocious color philosophy with emerge.  The reaction both times from
the gentoo community was merely a repeat of what I have come to expect
from several years of my own and from friends' and colleagues'
experiences: blame the messenger.  Lash out at the poster, don't
bother to even investigate the problem.  When in doubt, scream and
shout, run in circles, pull a pout.

I seldom complain any more.  It's not worth the hassle and feedback,
and it accomplishes nothing.  The gentoo developers have enough bad
eggs to tasint everybody.  There are plenty of good eggs, but they
need to speak up and stop the bad eggs from ruining their reputation.
I liken it to cops: as long as the good ones won't turn in the bad
ones for framing people, taking bribes, and general corrupt practices,
the good cops are going to be tarred with the same brush as the bad
ones.

-- 
            ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._.
     Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman & rocket surgeon / felix@crowfix.com
  GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E  6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933
I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

short correction/addition:

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 17:48:17 +0200
Hans-Werner Hilse <hilse@web.de> wrote:

> [...] complicated solutions like e.g. using readlink(1) [...]

or just throwing in find's "-L" switch.


-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[b.n.]

felix@crowfix.com ha scritto:
> I filed a bug which was promptly closed
> for no good reason, only the bogus answer that the new configuraion
> files layout took care of it.  I reopened it with a more detailed
> description of the problem and included the URL of the apache
> documentation which explains that the suexec binary has to be compiled
> with the USERDIR values known at compile time.  A week later, the bug
> was properly closed with a better solution than the old 2.2 solution,
> and a more permanent solution than my home grown work around.

So complaining, in the end, actually worked, isn't it?  You had your bug
solved in one week. Doesn't look bad at all to me.

> Some may remember me from whining a month or two ago about the
> atrocious color philosophy with emerge.  The reaction both times from
> the gentoo community was merely a repeat of what I have come to expect
> from several years of my own and from friends' and colleagues'
> experiences: blame the messenger.  Lash out at the poster, don't
> bother to even investigate the problem.  When in doubt, scream and
> shout, run in circles, pull a pout.

No. I remember that thread and as far as I remember you were simply told
that there were a lot of things you could do to solve the issue, but
that whining of the users mailing list wasn't one of that. And when told
to contact emerge developers you just told that their coding style
showed they're too dumb people to dishonor yourself going down the
stairs from the heavens to earth and talk to them. How it's different
that from "When in doubt, scream and shout, run in circles, pull a pout." ?

Note that the "atrocious color philosophy" wasn't even actually a bug:
was just an annoying usability problem. Given that you were one of the
very few to complain about it (not that you didn't have the right to
complain, of course: I remember what the problem was and I'm quite
sympathetic to you about it: but still, you were one of the few thinking
it was actually really important) while other gentoo users happily use
emerge and like (or at least do not find "atrocious") its colors, maybe
the developers have a point in shifting the color problem down in the
priority list. This is a clear case of "The world does not revolve
around you" awareness.

> I seldom complain any more.  It's not worth the hassle and feedback,
> and it accomplishes nothing.  

You just posted an example where you told us that it accomplished a lot
in solving the apache bug.

> The gentoo developers have enough bad
> eggs to tasint everybody.  There are plenty of good eggs, but they
> need to speak up and stop the bad eggs from ruining their reputation.
> I liken it to cops: as long as the good ones won't turn in the bad
> ones for framing people, taking bribes, and general corrupt practices,
> the good cops are going to be tarred with the same brush as the bad
> ones.

Oh, please. Gentoo developers are just human beings. Developers are not
renowned for their friendliness, and (like everyone else) sometimes they
can be rude, nasty, unhelpful or plain stupid. I know that, I understand
that. But how can one of the "bad" ones taint the other ones, is beyond
my comprehension. Do you think Gentoo developers are a gang of teddy boys?

You (and the OP) IMHO suffer of having not enough patience. Patience is
a hard virtue to build, and it's painful to deal with. Still, you have
to use it to gain something. You can't just do one, two attempts and
then throw the towel. If the developer does not understand, try to
understand why he does not. Probably your situation resembles a common
problem that he's used to see people complain but that it is not a bug
(like yours could be instead): explain carefully it. Try to get someone
else to reproduce the bug and let him/her add up to your bug report.
Show some will to collaborate in solving the problem. Have respect for
their work, always: they owe you nothing, they're doing it for *free*,
for you. When I did it, the few times I had to report a bug, I had my
problems solved in hours or days at most.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Alexander Skwar]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=180935
> 
> Again the old philosophy "what I don't understand is invalid".
> 
> Obviously my contributions are unwelcomed, so I closed the bug.

Yep, Jakub often has a quite jerky "tone". So do a lot of the
Gentoo devs.

Alexander Skwar

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:

<snip>
 
> so first you went to the wrong bugzilla and made a big fuss.
> Then you went to the gentoo-bugzilla and made even more fuss.

Yes, I first expected it to be an firefox bug, so I filed the bug there.
After I found out that the ff source didn't contain that error message,
I had I look elsewhere and learned that it's produced by an Gentoo 
specific script coming from another package. So I filed the bug there.

BTW: what do you exactly mean with "made a big fuss" ? 

> And in less than a day you have concluded that nobody is interessted 
> in your problem or patch.

Yes, because certain (responsible) people directly expressed it to me,
again (as usual).

<snip>
 
> You are really fast - but have you ever tried to create a NEW PROFILE 
> WITH THE CORRECT DIR INSTEAD OF SYMLINKS? NO?

That's far, far away from my problem. I do not need any new profile, 
and the profile is okay. The symlinks have to be there, explicitly.
Firefox does not have any slightest problem with that. (why should it ?)
It's Gentoo's "mozilla-launcher", which introduces that problem. 

> Just start firefox with firefox -Profilemanager

And then ? 
Hope that mozilla-launcher gets repaired by itself ?

> Oh, and retry. Maybe adding the author of mozilla-launcher to the bug?

Do I have permission for that ? That's new to me.
 
> Because, you know, the bugwranglers aren't perfect-all-knowing persons 
> - and you are so smart, you should be able to find the dev who is responsible 
> for mozilla-launcher...

Isn't it exactly the job of the bugwranglers to delegate bugs to the
responsible persons ? 

Sometimes it seems, certain wranglers are for killing bugs of specific 
persons ;-O
 
> For the rest - a typical Enrico-mail. Please don't stop. Go on, nothing 
> to see here.

Yeah, I already know you don't like me. I dont care.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[felix]

Complaining TWICE worked.  The problem I complained about shouldn't
have happened in the first place; someonex fixed something that wasn't
broken and made it broken.

Your response is absolutely typical of my problem with the gentoo dev
community.  You misstate a complaint, overreact to it, and apparently
feel pretty smug about your accomplishment.  No one will admit to the
two screwups (first breaking a working ebuild, second incorrectly
closing a bug on it).  Instead you lash out at those who point out
problems.

Yes, I had the wrong program when I compalined about the color
problem.  But the gentoo community response then as now was to lash
out, scream and shout, not to actually investigate.  And when I
finally left the thread alone, you geniuses were still ranting about
it three days later when I next checked.

You folks may think you have a cool system, and it is in some ways and
could be in many others.  But I know many people who tried gentoo and
bailed precisely because of the shoot the messenger mentality so
pervasive here; the self-selected sample you see is meaningless.

Go ahead, have another three days' fun.  Maybe I'll spark some more
tinders in a month or two.  I wouldn't want to deprive you of your
fun.

-- 
            ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._.
     Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman & rocket surgeon / felix@crowfix.com
  GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E  6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933
I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Mittwoch, 6. Juni 2007, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > so first you went to the wrong bugzilla and made a big fuss.
> > Then you went to the gentoo-bugzilla and made even more fuss.
>
> Yes, I first expected it to be an firefox bug, so I filed the bug there.
> After I found out that the ff source didn't contain that error message,
> I had I look elsewhere and learned that it's produced by an Gentoo
> specific script coming from another package. So I filed the bug there.
>
> BTW: what do you exactly mean with "made a big fuss" ?
>
> > And in less than a day you have concluded that nobody is interessted
> > in your problem or patch.
>
> Yes, because certain (responsible) people directly expressed it to me,
> again (as usual).
>
> <snip>
>
> > You are really fast - but have you ever tried to create a NEW PROFILE
> > WITH THE CORRECT DIR INSTEAD OF SYMLINKS? NO?
>
> That's far, far away from my problem. I do not need any new profile,
> and the profile is okay. The symlinks have to be there, explicitly.
> Firefox does not have any slightest problem with that. (why should it ?)
> It's Gentoo's "mozilla-launcher", which introduces that problem.
>
> > Just start firefox with firefox -Profilemanager
>
> And then ?
> Hope that mozilla-launcher gets repaired by itself ?

no? but if it works that way, it is not even defective..

>
> > Oh, and retry. Maybe adding the author of mozilla-launcher to the bug?
>
> Do I have permission for that ? That's new to me.
>
> > Because, you know, the bugwranglers aren't perfect-all-knowing persons
> > - and you are so smart, you should be able to find the dev who is
> > responsible for mozilla-launcher...
>
> Isn't it exactly the job of the bugwranglers to delegate bugs to the
> responsible persons ?


and bug wranglers are just humans. And humans a) are not perfect and b) 
sometimes make errors.

>
> Sometimes it seems, certain wranglers are for killing bugs of specific
> persons ;-O

well, Jakub is very fast closing bugs - and sometimes he closes them too 
fast... this is nothing new - and arguing with him in a civil manner usually 
solves that.

>
> > For the rest - a typical Enrico-mail. Please don't stop. Go on, nothing
> > to see here.
>
> Yeah, I already know you don't like me. I dont care.

no, I don't like the manner you regularly make a lot of noise about nothing.

I don't know you, so I can't know if I like you or not.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Hans-Werner Hilse <hilse@web.de> wrote:

> Well, since your awesome efforts last time, everyone here already 
> knows you're the most polite bug reporter, absolutely fair and

I'm really tired of your boring personal attacks. 
Can't you come up with some more interesting ? Maybe a polar 
weather report or an fallen over rice bag ? ...
 
> Your solution to that bug was charming and short: Dump what you 
> didn't see making sense 

In fact: yes. It doesn't make sense to me that startup is refused
if the files do not seem to be owned by the current user. Eons 
ago it had been okay, but today (with ACLs) this is really no 
reliable source on permissions.

> (is that what you said about things being "invalid" ?) 

NO. The bug, so the whole issue (not my patch), was declared invalid.
This means nothing else that "there is no problem".

> -- instead of complicated solutions like e.g. using readlink(1) 
> and keeping at least the functionality in there.

At the point where my bug was declared invalid, there was no more
motivation for me to think about that. 

Why wasn't you solution just said in the bug, as response of mine ?
Then I just would have tried it and we had seen if worked. 

But obviously there's not cooperation wanted w/ me.
Neither my fault nor my problem.



cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:


> > And then ?
> > Hope that mozilla-launcher gets repaired by itself ?
> 
> no? but if it works that way, it is not even defective..

It doesn't. Why do you assume it would ? 

<snip>

> > Isn't it exactly the job of the bugwranglers to delegate 
> > bugs to the responsible persons ?
> 
> and bug wranglers are just humans. And humans a) are not perfect 
> and b) sometimes make errors.

Ok, no problem. But is that the fault of the reporter ? Obviously not.
If a bug gets to the wrong dev, he simply kicks it back or directly
to the right person. Trivial.

> > Sometimes it seems, certain wranglers are for killing bugs of 
> > specific persons ;-O
> 
> well, Jakub is very fast closing bugs - and sometimes he closes 
> them too fast... this is nothing new - and arguing with him in a 
> civil manner usually solves that.

I'm some bit confused that the wranglers should do such decisions 
at all (if they're not also involved in the affected package).


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2007, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> seems, certain wranglers are for killing bugs of
>
> > > specific persons ;-O
> >
> > well, Jakub is very fast closing bugs - and sometimes he closes
> > them too fast... this is nothing new - and arguing with him in a
> > civil manner usually solves that.
>
> I'm some bit confused that the wranglers should do such decisions
> at all (if they're not also involved in the affected package).

because it is their job to filter out noise so 'real' devs can concentrate on 
the 'real' bugs. They are the first line of defence. And since bug wranglers 
are humans, they can't know everything and sometimes they make a mistake. Bug 
wranglers are the first filter, if the bug is not assigned to a team. And 
sometimes, they filter things, that should not be filtered out. Stay calm, 
explain the situation - and in my experience it will resolved. But having a 
fit on this ml does not help anybody - it just looks bad. And it makes YOU 
look bad.

I have been at the wrong end of bug wranglers (Moc) and java devs (when I 
complained years ago, that updating one java vm, would change the user vm, 
even if that package would be unaffected. For example user vm sun, update of 
blackdown vm, user vm now blackdown vm. It took a lot of discussion, but it 
was worth it).

Did I complain on this mailing list?
No.
 Because I know that the devs are humans and that they are volunteers. 
Did that stop me from filing bugs?
Heck no!
 I just opened one yesterday and it was fixed in less than 12h... without fuss 
or discussions. 

Some people forget, that the devs are unpaid volunteers who are not perfect 
beings, but humans - and some people forget, that the world does not revolve 
around them.


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[»Q«]

In <news:20070606220352.GB2575@nibiru.local>,
Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> The bug, so the whole issue (not my patch), was declared invalid.
> This means nothing else that "there is no problem".

No, it doesn't mean you don't have a problem.  It means you don't have a
problem that Gentoo developers should solve for you.

-- 
»Q«

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Alexander Skwar]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> Sometimes it seems, certain wranglers are for killing bugs of specific
> persons ;-O

I don't know. I think it's just Jakub. He's REALLY quick to kill a
bug, especially if he doesn't completely understand what the bug is
about. This also pisses me off from time to time...

Alexander Skwar

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Alexander Skwar]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
> * Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:

>> well, Jakub is very fast closing bugs - and sometimes he closes
>> them too fast... this is nothing new - and arguing with him in a
>> civil manner usually solves that.
> 
> I'm some bit confused that the wranglers should do such decisions
> at all (if they're not also involved in the affected package).

If you disagree with his decision, simply reopen the bug. And do
so over and over again. 

Alexander Skwar

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:

> > I'm some bit confused that the wranglers should do such decisions
> > at all (if they're not also involved in the affected package).
> 
> because it is their job to filter out noise so 'real' devs can 
> concentrate on the 'real' bugs. They are the first line of defence. 

Oh, funny, devs have to be defended from users ?

This really reminds me on the behaviour of some great German Telco. 
They defend their techs (who often are really good folks) by stupid 
callcenter people who can do almost nothing. The new management has 
recognized that such extreamly bad service had cost about a million
of customers and so changes that. (yeah, I didn't belive it first,
but they're now really trying to do good service) ...

> And since bug wranglers are humans, they can't know everything 
> and sometimes they make a mistake.

Of course. And I don't blame them for doing some mistake.
The problem is that it happens virtually everytime. I don't know if
it only affects my bugs which are declared invalid per default.

It would be really okay, if the wrangler says: "please provide
more information" or "the patch makes trouble with [...]" etc. 
And if some makes an error, could simply say one word: sorry.
This would be an normal discussion, as civilized people used to do.

> Bug wranglers are the first filter, if the bug is not assigned 
> to a team. And sometimes, they filter things, that should not be 
> filtered out. Stay calm, explain the situation - 

Once, I did. But that did not work. I was titled stupid, my issues
were declared invalid and I was told to go away.

> But having a fit on this ml does not help anybody - 

For me, it helps. I just want to tell the public what's going on.
After that I feel better. If anything changes then is unimportant 
at this point ;-P

And of course I inform people of my fixes. If they're interested, 
they can pick 'em, otherwise simply ignore me. 

> it just looks bad. And it makes YOU look bad.

I dont care. It totally irrelevant to me, if I look good or bad 
in such an unimportant area like b.g.o.

All that matters is that I get my problems solved as quick and
easy as possible. And of course I like to give my works on OSS
back to the community. 


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 00:03:52 +0200 Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de>
wrote:

> > Well, since your awesome efforts last time, everyone here already 
> > knows you're the most polite bug reporter, absolutely fair and
> 
> I'm really tired of your boring personal attacks. 

In fact, it was the first one. I never replied to any of your harsh,
unfriendly postings before. I really regret I did this time (not
because I didn't mean it the way I've put it). And BTW: I *did* reply to
nice and civilized postings of yours in the past.

> > Your solution to that bug was charming and short: Dump what you 
> > didn't see making sense 
> 
> In fact: yes. It doesn't make sense to me that startup is refused
> if the files do not seem to be owned by the current user. Eons 
> ago it had been okay, but today (with ACLs) this is really no 
> reliable source on permissions.

This certainly is a matter for discussion. And to go further, even the
references to earlier bugs in that section don't seem to have to do
with the problem. I think you're absolutely right in that there
shouldn't be a check at all, because it would be not really gentoo-like
to react over-jealous to users who want to shoot themselves in their
knees. So, yes, my feeling is the same: It's a stupid check.

However: That wasn't the point you made in your posting and neither in
the bug report. You stated instead that it breaks on symlinks and that
this specifically is the problem. Your "fix" was too general for what
it stated to fix. It removed the functionality that it claimed to fix.
Without explanation and reasoning, I'm really happy that such bugs are
not blindly accepted, i.e. at least regarding the fix.

> > (is that what you said about things being "invalid" ?) 
> 
> NO. The bug, so the whole issue (not my patch), was declared invalid.
> This means nothing else that "there is no problem".

And you really read the according notice, right? That you should reopen
it if it isn't fixed for you, yes? Well, I've definately seen some more
harsh bug closures.

> Why wasn't you solution just said in the bug, as response of mine ?
> Then I just would have tried it and we had seen if worked. 

I better leave the reasoning w/ Jakub to you. I think that's a nice
exercise in working out some personal problems with him expressed in
your answers to that bug report. I really didn't feel like putting my
ideas below *that* kind of text. In fact, I would be more likely opening
a new bug, if it ever bites me.


-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2007, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:
> > > I'm some bit confused that the wranglers should do such decisions
> > > at all (if they're not also involved in the affected package).
> >
> > because it is their job to filter out noise so 'real' devs can
> > concentrate on the 'real' bugs. They are the first line of defence.
>
> Oh, funny, devs have to be defended from users ?

from abusive users?
yes

also from mediocre bug reports, and bugs where the problem is PEBCAC.
Because their time is limited. So they need people who filter out the junk.

>
> This really reminds me on the behaviour of some great German Telco.
> They defend their techs (who often are really good folks) by stupid
> callcenter people who can do almost nothing. The new management has
> recognized that such extreamly bad service had cost about a million
> of customers and so changes that. (yeah, I didn't belive it first,
> but they're now really trying to do good service) ...

Telekom?

Telekom had always bad service, they have bad service, they will have bad 
service.

But you can't compare a multi-billion euro business with a VOLUNTEER project.

>
> > And since bug wranglers are humans, they can't know everything
> > and sometimes they make a mistake.
>
> Of course. And I don't blame them for doing some mistake.
> The problem is that it happens virtually everytime. I don't know if
> it only affects my bugs which are declared invalid per default.

and strangely it only happened once for me. Maybe it is the quality and tone 
of your bug reports?

>
> It would be really okay, if the wrangler says: "please provide
> more information" or "the patch makes trouble with [...]" etc.
> And if some makes an error, could simply say one word: sorry.
> This would be an normal discussion, as civilized people used to do.

and strangely, that is the usual way. 

Except with Jakub - but that is a completly different problem.

>
> > Bug wranglers are the first filter, if the bug is not assigned
> > to a team. And sometimes, they filter things, that should not be
> > filtered out. Stay calm, explain the situation -
>
> Once, I did. But that did not work. I was titled stupid, my issues
> were declared invalid and I was told to go away.

and you did?

I stayed and after the third or fourth comment someone with the knowledge came 
in and ended it.

If your bug is valid, stay there. Explain your problem. Maybe cc the correct 
teams/devs.

As I said, the bug wranglers are just human (and one of them is pretty... 
harsh).

>
> > But having a fit on this ml does not help anybody -
>
> For me, it helps. I just want to tell the public what's going on.
> After that I feel better. If anything changes then is unimportant
> at this point ;-P

but nothing changes because the people responsible for your anger do not read 
this.

>
> And of course I inform people of my fixes. If they're interested,
> they can pick 'em, otherwise simply ignore me.

and what about the people not subscribed to the ml?

>
> > it just looks bad. And it makes YOU look bad.
>
> I dont care. It totally irrelevant to me, if I look good or bad
> in such an unimportant area like b.g.o.

for an unimportant area you make a lot of fuss about it.

>
> All that matters is that I get my problems solved as quick and
> easy as possible. And of course I like to give my works on OSS
> back to the community.
>

but complaining on the ml, instead to the devs, userrel oder devrel, won't 
solve your problem. If you feel abused, talk to userrel/devrel. It is their 
JOB to resolve the situation. And the last time a certain bugwrangler was too 
abusive, he got hit with the cluehammer 40 000.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[b.n.]

felix@crowfix.com ha scritto:
> Complaining TWICE worked.  

Is it so bad? I'd say complaining ten times would be bad, but twice
seems a reasonable number of attempts.

> The problem I complained about shouldn't
> have happened in the first place; someonex fixed something that wasn't
> broken and made it broken.

Bugs! What an awkward occurrence in the world of programming! And, even
more unusual, people who should improve programs... introduce new bugs
too! Alas! They even have a word for these "incredibly rare" kind of
bugs: regressions. They are as common as shit, my friend. I just
discovered two of them, today, in the data analysis software I code in
my lab :)

Probably someone fixed something that WAS broken but, doing that, also
unfixed something else. In programming, often, tightening a string
somewhere looses it somewhere else. Bug fixing is harder than
programming itself.

> Your response is absolutely typical of my problem with the gentoo dev
> community.  You misstate a complaint, overreact to it, and apparently
> feel pretty smug about your accomplishment. 

Where did I misstate (?) a complaint?
Where did I overreact?
And where did I feel smug about it?

You had perfectly legit complaints. I (we) just told you what the
correct procedure to get solved is. Note:maybe it won't get them solved,
I agree. But ranting is not a way either. All you can logically do is
try again to follow the procedure, or fix them yourself. There's nothing
else you can do. Really.

> No one will admit to the
> two screwups (first breaking a working ebuild, second incorrectly
> closing a bug on it).  Instead you lash out at those who point out
> problems.

I fully, completely admit the screwups!
What you fail to understand is that they're common everyday problems
that will always occur on a large project like an operating system
distribution, and that there are methods to fix them most of the time.

> Yes, I had the wrong program when I compalined about the color
> problem.  But the gentoo community response then as now was to lash
> out, scream and shout, not to actually investigate.

What there was to "investigate"?
First, we are NOT the community that must "investigate", since we're
users, not devels. Ask devels to "investigate".
Second, your problem was not something like, say, "X freezing, no error
messages, where could I look?", but more like "colours ugly as hell, wtf
why don't they change them". What is there to investigate about that?
Everyone not colour-blind on this list knows what colours has emerge:
investigation finished.
Third, you actually already did all the investigation possible. You, IIRC:
-looked at emerge code
-didn't like that (probably rightly so)
-told yourself they're too dumb to even understand a complain (not
rightly so, IMHO)
-rant on gentoo-users

Really, what should have we done? It is not a rhetoric question: I just
don't understand. If you can tell me an example of what should we have
done, I'm really and sincerely happy to hear it.

>  And when I
> finally left the thread alone, you geniuses were still ranting about
> it three days later when I next checked.

That's a good point. We can't resist flamebaits, that's all. :) But so,
what has it to do with the problem?

> You folks may think you have a cool system, and it is in some ways and
> could be in many others.  But I know many people who tried gentoo and
> bailed precisely because of the shoot the messenger mentality so
> pervasive here; the self-selected sample you see is meaningless.

Well, I tell you a secret: even with all its quirks and defects, Gentoo
has one of the more friendly and helpful communities in the OSS world.
Try have a look at the Debian, OpenBSD or Slackware forums/ml/IRC
channels, and you'll understand.

> Go ahead, have another three days' fun.  Maybe I'll spark some more
> tinders in a month or two.  I wouldn't want to deprive you of your
> fun.

I can't understand your sarcasm. It's you that put flamebaits in the
forests -how can you blame us for the fire? :)

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Kent Fredric]

On 6/8/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, I tell you a secret: even with all its quirks and defects, Gentoo
> has one of the more friendly and helpful communities in the OSS world.
> Try have a look at the Debian, OpenBSD or Slackware forums/ml/IRC
> channels, and you'll understand.

I concur, not only does gentoo have one of the nicer communities, it
also has more informed people. ( probably releated to it being a
generally harder distro to use that *cough* ewwbuntu *cough*
unlinspired *cough*  or *cough* deadrat *cough* )

Many a time you'll find in non gentoo help rooms that everyones just
as lost as you are when you have a /real/ problem, and when you have a
/real/ problem you'll end up fixing it yourself after helping 50 other
people fix theirs.

Many a time Has it been I've googled for an answer to a problem and
the answer has been found amongst gentoos troves of data, in either
wiki, or forum, despite the fact that the problem i encoutered may
have occured on a non-gentoo box, and i did not enter 'gentoo'
anywhere in the search string.


-- 
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Samstag, 9. Juni 2007, b.n. wrote:
> Kent Fredric ha scritto:
> > On 6/8/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ( probably releated to it being a
> > generally harder distro to use that *cough* ewwbuntu *cough*
> > unlinspired *cough*  or *cough* deadrat *cough* )
>
> OT: Ubuntu distros (Kubuntu, expecially) are really, really shiny and
> slick pieces of software. I just installed Kubuntu 7.04 at work and it's
>  the more polished, ready-to-go, easy to use Linux distro I've ever
> seen. I use Gentoo on my home desktop for various reasons and because I
> have different needs, but the Linux community has only to learn from the
> Ubuntus.
>

what to learn? How to make kcontrol worse? The slowest boot of all times? A 
braindead installer? A patched-to-death kpdf?

Yes, there is something to learn from the ubuntus. Like: don't make their 
mistakes. Or: there is a difference between userfriendly and made for idiots.

Been there - I will never touch *buntu again. If I ever feel the need to use 
something else than gentoo it will be Slackware. Lean, mean, fast slackware.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[OT] Ubuntu isn't the devil (was: Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid)

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3135 bytes --]

On Friday 08 June 2007, "Hemmann, Volker Armin" 
<volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 
Again: Critical bugs considered invalid':
> On Samstag, 9. Juni 2007, b.n. wrote:
> > Kent Fredric ha scritto:
> > > On 6/8/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > ( probably releated to it being a
> > > generally harder distro to use that *cough* ewwbuntu *cough*
> > > unlinspired *cough*  or *cough* deadrat *cough* )
> >
> > OT: Ubuntu distros (Kubuntu, expecially) are really, really shiny and
> > slick pieces of software. I just installed Kubuntu 7.04 at work and
> > it's the more polished, ready-to-go, easy to use Linux distro I've
> > ever seen. I use Gentoo on my home desktop for various reasons and
> > because I have different needs, but the Linux community has only to
> > learn from the Ubuntus.
>
> what to learn? How to make kcontrol worse?

I think many find ksystemsettings to be better a better interface than 
kcontrol.  I don't, so I just use kcontrol.  It is a little stupid that 
they don't install the desktop icon for it, but it's trivial to fix.

> The slowest boot of all 
> times?

My Gentoo boots more slowly, but that's probably related to the large delay 
mounting a 3TiB reiserfs.  Ubuntu can also be very quick to boot *if* all 
files read on startup fit into system ram throughout the startup sequence, 
on my laptop this isn't the case, so my booting is somewhat delayed.

> A braindead installer?

How exactly is it braindead?  I've used it multiple times and while it's 
error handling could be better, it's allowed me to do all the setup I need 
before the install starts and generally gets me run-and-running much 
faster and Gentoo.

> A patched-to-death kpdf?  

Yeah, ubuntu patches KDE left and right and it's a bit annoying, especially 
when they reduce usability for no good reason.  E.g. the search toolbar 
forces the cursor to the end of it's contents from time to time, and 
doesn't properly submit searches with parenthesis in them -- both issues 
make the search bar on Gentoo much better.

> Yes, there is something to learn from the ubuntus. Like: don't make
> their mistakes.

Their "mistakes" made them the most popular linux distribution in a 
incredibly small amount of time.  Their "mistakes" continue to drive user 
and developers toward the project in flocks.  Their "mistakes" lead to 
Dell shipping home systems with Ubuntu pre-installed.

I love Gentoo.  I love Debian.  I still think Ubuntu does some things 
better and some things worse.  On my laptop, I'd prefer not to configure 
anything -- and Ubuntu provides a usable system with no hassles.  Servers 
@ work -- Debian.  Desktop @ home -- Gentoo.  I don't think I'd change any 
of them.

> Or: there is a difference between userfriendly and made 
> for idiots.

Ubuntu being neither. ;)

-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                     ,= ,-_-. =. 
bss03@volumehost.net                      ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy           `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/                      \_/     

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [OT] Ubuntu isn't the devil (was: Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid)

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Samstag, 9. Juni 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> On Friday 08 June 2007, "Hemmann, Volker Armin"
> <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user]

> > The slowest boot of all
> > times?
>
> My Gentoo boots more slowly, but that's probably related to the large delay
> mounting a 3TiB reiserfs.  Ubuntu can also be very quick to boot *if* all
> files read on startup fit into system ram throughout the startup sequence,
> on my laptop this isn't the case, so my booting is somewhat delayed.

I have several boot cds. And none of them booted as slow as kubuntu 7.04.

yeah, reiserfs mounts slowly with really big drives - wasn't there a patch 
added recently to speed it up?

>
> > A braindead installer?
>
> How exactly is it braindead? 

like 'there is a freshly formated partition, but you have to format it again, 
because me, the mighty installer says so'?

>
> > Yes, there is something to learn from the ubuntus. Like: don't make
> > their mistakes.
>
> Their "mistakes" made them the most popular linux distribution in a
> incredibly small amount of time.  Their "mistakes" continue to drive user
> and developers toward the project in flocks.  Their "mistakes" lead to
> Dell shipping home systems with Ubuntu pre-installed.

nope,  what made them the 'most popular distribution' was the fact that they 
were hyped even before they released the first version. There have been other 
easy-to-use distos before and after ubuntu - and I am sure most of them would 
overtake ubuntu, if they would be hyped the same way.

>
> I love Gentoo.  I love Debian.  I still think Ubuntu does some things
> better and some things worse.  On my laptop, I'd prefer not to configure
> anything -- and Ubuntu provides a usable system with no hassles.  Servers
> @ work -- Debian.  Desktop @ home -- Gentoo.  I don't think I'd change any
> of them.
>

I don't love debian - it is just a distribution -  and I am annoyed by hype. 
Any kind of hype. I remember very well the hype around Mandrake (I got almost 
insane, when I tried it. Lots and lots of sugarly cute graphics and colours 
and no obvious way to turn it off...), I have seen the smaller hype around 
lindows, I luckily joined gentoo before the hype and I have seen ubuntu 
beeing hyped and reported as the 'bestest' distribution of all time, before 
they even released anything.

> > Or: there is a difference between userfriendly and made
> > for idiots.
>
> Ubuntu being neither. ;)

from my POV (you are free to see it differently) ubuntu is not userfriendly, 
it is idiot friendly. Some people might think, that I am an idiot, so I 
should shut up and be happy, but for me, ubuntu sucks. 

Everybody is entitled to have an opinion. I don't like ubuntu. If you like it, 
good for you. I won't stop you using it or belittle you for that. Everybody 
uses the distro that fits his needs - that is the great thing about choice. 
But for me, *buntu does not fit,
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[b.n.]

Kent Fredric ha scritto:
> On 6/8/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> ( probably releated to it being a
> generally harder distro to use that *cough* ewwbuntu *cough*
> unlinspired *cough*  or *cough* deadrat *cough* )

OT: Ubuntu distros (Kubuntu, expecially) are really, really shiny and
slick pieces of software. I just installed Kubuntu 7.04 at work and it's
 the more polished, ready-to-go, easy to use Linux distro I've ever
seen. I use Gentoo on my home desktop for various reasons and because I
have different needs, but the Linux community has only to learn from the
Ubuntus.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Ubuntu isn't the devil

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Samstag, 9. Juni 2007, b.n. wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin ha scritto:
> > I have several boot cds. And none of them booted as slow as kubuntu 7.04.
>
> The boot cd is slow as a molasses hell, but the installed system boots
> quite fast -slower than my Gentoo, but not significantly.
>
> > nope,  what made them the 'most popular distribution' was the fact that
> > they were hyped even before they released the first version. There have
> > been other easy-to-use distos before and after ubuntu - and I am sure
> > most of them would overtake ubuntu, if they would be hyped the same way.
>
> I was of the same opinion, *before* trying it and using it for a year at
> work. I've used a bunch of other binary distros: Mandrake, Debian,
> Slackware. Still, Kubuntu beated them all. I was full of negative
> prejudices, just because of the hype, like you, but I had to admit it
> was a fscking good system. With quirky bugs here and there, of course.
>
> Oh, and about the installer: well, Gentoo even hasn't a functional
> graphical installer, AFAIK (the advice everyone hears on mls and forums
> is: DO NOT USE THE GRAPHICAL INSTALLER! -so why ship it, if it's ~?)
> Minor glitches like having to reformat a clean partition do not look
> like "braindead" to me. The Slackware installer, that's just braindead
> imho (even if I have fun using it).

I hate the gentoo graphical installer with all my guts. IMHO it is just 
wrong ... 

>
> > I don't love debian - it is just a distribution -  and I am annoyed by
> > hype. Any kind of hype. I remember very well the hype around Mandrake (I
> > got almost insane, when I tried it. Lots and lots of sugarly cute
> > graphics and colours and no obvious way to turn it off...), I have seen
> > the smaller hype around lindows, I luckily joined gentoo before the hype
> > and I have seen ubuntu beeing hyped and reported as the 'bestest'
> > distribution of all time, before they even released anything.
>
> First *buntu releases were not 'bestest'. From 6.06 onward, it is at
> least in the first 3 places, for me.

no ubuntu release was 'the bestest distro ever' - except when you read all 
that stuff that was and is written with every release...

>
> > from my POV (you are free to see it differently) ubuntu is not
> > userfriendly, it is idiot friendly.
>
> That's GNOME. Use KDE, and it won't be idiot friendly anymore. Kubuntu
> KDE doesn't look that much different from my KDE on Gentoo, apart it's
> configured a little better.

I tried Kubuntu...

but I don't only look after the desktop - and it was the completly package. 
Boot, installer, sudo, that really got me... angry.

>
> By the way: I'd love to know how is kpdf patched. I use kpdf at work
> with Kubuntu and here on Gentoo, and they look pretty identical. I'm
> sure you're right: I just don't know what are the differences.

I am too lazy to use google right now but this should give you are starting 
point (and also explain why kubuntu's and gentoo's kpdf are so similar - in 
b0rkiness)
http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/articles/2007/01/28/today-in-gentoos-kde-land
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Ubuntu isn't the devil

[b.n.]

Hemmann, Volker Armin ha scritto:

> I have several boot cds. And none of them booted as slow as kubuntu 7.04.

The boot cd is slow as a molasses hell, but the installed system boots
quite fast -slower than my Gentoo, but not significantly.

> nope,  what made them the 'most popular distribution' was the fact that they 
> were hyped even before they released the first version. There have been other 
> easy-to-use distos before and after ubuntu - and I am sure most of them would 
> overtake ubuntu, if they would be hyped the same way.

I was of the same opinion, *before* trying it and using it for a year at
work. I've used a bunch of other binary distros: Mandrake, Debian,
Slackware. Still, Kubuntu beated them all. I was full of negative
prejudices, just because of the hype, like you, but I had to admit it
was a fscking good system. With quirky bugs here and there, of course.

Oh, and about the installer: well, Gentoo even hasn't a functional
graphical installer, AFAIK (the advice everyone hears on mls and forums
is: DO NOT USE THE GRAPHICAL INSTALLER! -so why ship it, if it's ~?)
Minor glitches like having to reformat a clean partition do not look
like "braindead" to me. The Slackware installer, that's just braindead
imho (even if I have fun using it).

> I don't love debian - it is just a distribution -  and I am annoyed by hype. 
> Any kind of hype. I remember very well the hype around Mandrake (I got almost 
> insane, when I tried it. Lots and lots of sugarly cute graphics and colours 
> and no obvious way to turn it off...), I have seen the smaller hype around 
> lindows, I luckily joined gentoo before the hype and I have seen ubuntu 
> beeing hyped and reported as the 'bestest' distribution of all time, before 
> they even released anything.

First *buntu releases were not 'bestest'. From 6.06 onward, it is at
least in the first 3 places, for me.

> from my POV (you are free to see it differently) ubuntu is not userfriendly, 
> it is idiot friendly. 

That's GNOME. Use KDE, and it won't be idiot friendly anymore. Kubuntu
KDE doesn't look that much different from my KDE on Gentoo, apart it's
configured a little better.

By the way: I'd love to know how is kpdf patched. I use kpdf at work
with Kubuntu and here on Gentoo, and they look pretty identical. I'm
sure you're right: I just don't know what are the differences.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Kent Fredric]

On 6/9/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kent Fredric ha scritto:
> > On 6/8/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ( probably releated to it being a
> > generally harder distro to use that *cough* ewwbuntu *cough*
> > unlinspired *cough*  or *cough* deadrat *cough* )
>
> OT: Ubuntu distros (Kubuntu, expecially) are really, really shiny and
> slick pieces of software. I just installed Kubuntu 7.04 at work and it's
>  the more polished, ready-to-go, easy to use Linux distro I've ever
> seen. I use Gentoo on my home desktop for various reasons and because I
> have different needs, but the Linux community has only to learn from the
> Ubuntus.

OT: My detest for the aformentioned brands are experience driven
except for the linspire. Genoo > Everything.

I can say this because I started on debian pretty much, and being a
control freak, I like everything the way I like it, not the way
somebody else says I should like it. Gentoo is more free ( in the 'do
what you want' )  sense than any other distro I know of.  Periodic
releases which force users to re-install  effectively to upgrade =
bollux.  I know with ewbuntu family you dont really /have/ to, but
most do anyway, and theres always this _hype_ with every 'release'
that comes out which i just don't get. My software is newer, and the
only 'release' I ever see is a new profile.

I jumped ship because I was in debian, and compiling a lot of things
by hand because they wern't available in unstable/experimental yet,
and the software was _STILL_ stale, and figgured going to a
source-based distro was the logical step.

Ease of use & userfriendlyness are /not/ things i look for in an OS.
Unless they're tools and things ill actually use,  I care not. Beryl ,
Compiz & XGL i'll never be caught dead using, ive experimented with
them just to see what the fuss is about , and then i turn them off and
stay that way.



-- 
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Ubuntu isn't the devil

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2363 bytes --]

On Friday 08 June 2007 23:34, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> On Friday 08 June 2007, "Hemmann, Volker Armin"
> <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user]

> > > OT: Ubuntu distros (Kubuntu, expecially) are really, really shiny and
> > > slick pieces of software. I just installed Kubuntu 7.04 at work and
> > > it's the more polished, ready-to-go, easy to use Linux distro I've
> > > ever seen. I use Gentoo on my home desktop for various reasons and
> > > because I have different needs, but the Linux community has only to
> > > learn from the Ubuntus.
[snip]
>
> > Or: there is a difference between userfriendly and made
> > for idiots.
>
> Ubuntu being neither. ;)

This is a bit [OT] on the [OT]:  

a)Difficult to install packages of choice:

I tried to install TinyERP on a Ubuntu server (feisty) and it's fallen apart 
on python2.4-psycopg.  I've tried different things (ref. 
http://tinyerp.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=11122#11122  ) but could not get it 
to install and run.

I suspect that this is not an exceptional experience because the week before 
it took me more than a day of digging and symlinking to get openbravo to 
install on the same box.

In frustration I decided to install TinyERP on my Gentoo PC for the Ubuntu's 
server owner to try out, in case he changes his mind and saves me the hustle 
of trying to install it on Ubuntu.

b)Upgrades

I ran apt-get upgrade and dist-upgrade to upgrade to feisty and ended up 
having to reinstall, because the end product was unbootable.  There were no 
warnings, no messages, no suggestions as to what config files might have 
needed editing (don't you just love etc-update).

You might argue that all of the above are indicative of my lack of knowledge 
of binary distros, their dependency conflicts and in particular Ubuntu's 
inner works. You would be right, except that Ubuntu is meant to be 
idiot-proof.  On the other hand my Gentoo experience has been comparatively 
much more painless and seriously less time consuming, despite needing to iron 
out some problems with the installation of postreSQL (a 15 minute exercise in 
total).

Just my 2c's.

PS. If you have any suggestions as to how I can complete the install of 
TinyERP on Ubuntu I'd be grateful if you can email me off list!  :)
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Ubuntu isn't the devil

[b.n.]

Mick ha scritto:
> b)Upgrades
> 
> I ran apt-get upgrade and dist-upgrade to upgrade to feisty and ended up 
> having to reinstall, because the end product was unbootable.  There were no 
> warnings, no messages, no suggestions as to what config files might have 
> needed editing (don't you just love etc-update).
> 
> You might argue that all of the above are indicative of my lack of knowledge 
> of binary distros, their dependency conflicts and in particular Ubuntu's 
> inner works. You would be right, except that Ubuntu is meant to be 
> idiot-proof.  On the other hand my Gentoo experience has been comparatively 
> much more painless and seriously less time consuming, despite needing to iron 
> out some problems with the installation of postreSQL (a 15 minute exercise in 
> total).

Upgrades on Ubuntu, I agree, just suck. Nearly everyone will advise you
to avoid dist-upgrades and just reinstall. I know of people that
upgraded painlessly, but they're more the exception than the norm.

That's one of the big reasons I don't want it on my desktop box and I'm
extremly happy with Gentoo, that requires no full upgrade but works on
incremental upgrades.

That is THE thing that *buntus should learn hard from gentoo, in fact.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Iain Buchanan]

On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 21:13 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:

>  Genoo > Everything.

given Everything = Gentoo + Debian + RedHat + ...,
let EverythingElse = Everything - Gentoo;

then
 Gentoo > Everything
  =~ Gentoo > Gentoo + EverythingElse
  =~ Gentoo - Gentoo > Gentoo + EveryThingElse - Gentoo
  =~ 0 > EverythingElse
  =~ EverythingElse < 0

I agree!
-- 
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au>

"The biggest problem facing software engineering is the one it will 
 never solve - politics." 
 -- Gavin Baker, ca 1996, An unusually cynical moment inspired by working on a large
    project beseiged by politics

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Kent Fredric]

On 6/11/07, Iain Buchanan <iaindb@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 21:13 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
>
> >  Genoo > Everything.
>
> given Everything = Gentoo + Debian + RedHat + ...,
> let EverythingElse = Everything - Gentoo;
>
> then
>  Gentoo > Everything
>   =~ Gentoo > Gentoo + EverythingElse
>   =~ Gentoo - Gentoo > Gentoo + EveryThingElse - Gentoo
>   =~ 0 > EverythingElse
>   =~ EverythingElse < 0
>
> I agree!

If that concept is a first, I suggest it go into fortune-mod-gentoo-forums.

That is certainly quote worthy imo :D
-- 
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Dan Farrell]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 01:18:58 +1200
"Kent Fredric" <kentfredric@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 6/11/07, Iain Buchanan <iaindb@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 21:13 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
> >
> > >  Genoo > Everything.
> >
> > given Everything = Gentoo + Debian + RedHat + ...,
> > let EverythingElse = Everything - Gentoo;
> >
> > then
> >  Gentoo > Everything
> >   =~ Gentoo > Gentoo + EverythingElse
> >   =~ Gentoo - Gentoo > Gentoo + EveryThingElse - Gentoo
> >   =~ 0 > EverythingElse
> >   =~ EverythingElse < 0
> >
> > I agree!
> 
> If that concept is a first, I suggest it go into
> fortune-mod-gentoo-forums.
> 
> That is certainly quote worthy imo :D


Oh, I don't know about that... "x > everything" doesn't seem like a
very witty way to begin a quotable concept.  
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] How much patching is good for an distro ? (WAS: Ubuntu isn't the devil)

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss03@volumehost.net> wrote:

Hi folks,

> > A patched-to-death kpdf?  
> 
> Yeah, ubuntu patches KDE left and right and it's a bit annoying, especially 

This raises the question how much patching is good for an distro.

As far as I understood Gentoo's policies, ports should stay as close
as possible to the upstream. In fact in some ebuilds much magic is 
happening to get around really broken upstream (ie. netqmail). 

I understand that policy, but IMHO it doesn't go far enough. 

My ideal would be:

* The distro should not contain any broken package. If it does not 
  run out of the box and requires additional packages, I'd consider
  it as broken. 
* An package must provide all customizability which is required 
  for that distro (ie. specifying pathes, DESTDIR installing,
  switching features, etc). Otherwise: broken.
* The buildsystem must be clean and easy to use. The necessary 
  steps (unpacking/preparing the sourcetree, configuring, compiling,
  installing) must be doable with just an command line, without 
  any additional logic required. Otherise: broken
* Builds have to be deterministic. No hidden and unnecessary deps.
  And crosscompiling must be possible w/o any code changes.
  Otherwise: broken.
  
Okay, these are really hard constraints (which have been proven in
my embedded works), BUT:

* If an package is broken and upstream release an really fixed version
  within reasonable time, we simply fork off an "stabelized" branch.
* That branch is normally provided by an single patch against the 
  upstream release.
* Fixes here are done generic, not distro specific. 
* The forks are maintained in an separate project, independent from 
  distros, but working close to them. 
* This project also works close to the upstream and also tries to 
  get the fixes in.

Actually that's what my OSS-QM project is all about.
(ugh, just seen the wiki's still offline after I rebuild my server,
so I'll post the link once I got it up again ;-O)

BTW: the OSS-QM project works very close to the CSDB.
(http://sourcefarm.metuxde/)


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Iain Buchanan]

On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 09:48 -0500, Dan Farrell wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 01:18:58 +1200
> "Kent Fredric" <kentfredric@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 6/11/07, Iain Buchanan <iaindb@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 21:13 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
> > >
> > > >  Genoo > Everything.
> > >
> > > given Everything = Gentoo + Debian + RedHat + ...,
> > > let EverythingElse = Everything - Gentoo;
> > >
> > > then
> > >  Gentoo > Everything
> > >   =~ Gentoo > Gentoo + EverythingElse
> > >   =~ Gentoo - Gentoo > Gentoo + EveryThingElse - Gentoo
> > >   =~ 0 > EverythingElse
> > >   =~ EverythingElse < 0
> > >
> > > I agree!
> > 
> > If that concept is a first, I suggest it go into
> > fortune-mod-gentoo-forums.

yes, I made it up just then.

> > That is certainly quote worthy imo :D

thanks.

> Oh, I don't know about that... "x > everything" doesn't seem like a
> very witty way to begin a quotable concept.  

it did of course rely on the "given" by Kent Fredric, whether that is
provable or not is left as an exercise for the reader :)

cya, 
-- 
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au>

The 357.73 Theory:
	Auditors always reject expense accounts
	with a bottom line divisible by 5.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list