From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: omb@bluewin.ch
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [OT] Joerg Schilling flames Linux on his Blog
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 01:59:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050521235928.GL4489@stusta.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <428F644A.3000801@khandalf.com>
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 06:39:38PM +0200, Brian O'Mahoney wrote:
>
>
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >
> > In my personal experience, the Solaris packages are quite usable.
> >
> > I don't claim they were perfect, but do you have compelling reasons why
> > you call the people who developed it "idiots"?
>
> The point I made was that SUN do support/use the GNU toolchain
> internally, and everyone has used GNU on SUN since they started to
> charge for the Solaris C compiler in the 80's. They also have RPM
> and it is only recently they integrated Perl and I object to this
> attitude whether it comes from SUN or MicroSoft
>
> As to pkg* just look at what is missing/deficient -v- any OpenSource
> tool, which was desingned by those that were going to _use_ it not
> just tick a check box
It was nice if you would name the points why you think Solaris packages
are that inferior to e.g. RPM or dpkg packages.
E.g. if you know a standard way how to get the same functionality as
request/pkgask in Solaris packages for RPM packages I'd be glad to hear
about.
Not that I'd claim that Solaris packages were perfect.
Some examples:
- Solaris packages don't support upgrades of packages.
- I know in neither RPM nor Solaris packages a mechanism similarly
powerful to the dpkg diversions.
I'd personally say dpkg is the best of this three package formats. But I
have to admit that RPM is the one amongst them I know the least, and you
can correct my statements regarding RPM if you know better.
But altogether, I don't see any of these three package formats being
hopelessly inferior to the other two.
> It is typical of the period in which AT&T had more Marketeers and Lawers
> working on Unix that there were developers. These were the guys who
> helped to start the Unix wars.
You said:
Finally SUN should move from the pkg* abortion, written by idiots
at AT&T, some 25 years ago to RPM.
If you call people "idiots", you should at least be able to give some
hard facts where exactly they should have done something different based
on the knowledge that was available at the time they did it.
And it seems you also missed that the Solaris package format has evolved
over the years.
> mit freundlichen Grüßen, Brian.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-21 23:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-20 17:45 [OT] Joerg Schilling flames Linux on his Blog Patrick McFarland
2005-05-20 17:02 ` jmerkey
2005-05-20 18:24 ` Markus Plail
2005-05-20 18:34 ` Matthias-Christian Ott
2005-05-20 18:41 ` Lee Revell
2005-05-20 23:20 ` Brian O'Mahoney
2005-05-21 7:38 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-05-21 11:25 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2005-05-21 11:33 ` Måns Rullgård
2005-05-22 18:24 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2005-05-21 11:41 ` André Tomt
2005-05-21 23:24 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-05-22 0:27 ` Andre Tomt
2005-05-22 14:17 ` Matthias Andree
2005-05-21 16:39 ` Brian O'Mahoney
2005-05-21 23:59 ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2005-05-22 1:22 ` Andrew Haninger
2005-05-22 4:23 ` [OT] Joerg Schilling flames Linux on his Blog/cdrecord replacement Brian O'Mahoney
2005-05-22 14:36 ` Matthias Andree
2005-05-22 17:42 ` Matthias Urlichs
2005-05-22 4:50 ` [OT] Joerg Schilling flames Linux on his Blog Patrick McFarland
2005-05-22 14:39 ` Matthias Andree
2005-05-22 20:40 ` Bernhard Rosenkraenzer
2005-05-22 15:54 ` Alistair John Strachan
2005-05-23 13:17 ` Nix
2005-05-23 14:35 ` Brian O'Mahoney
2005-05-23 14:58 ` Nix
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-05-25 13:15 OT] " Joerg Schilling
2005-05-25 23:12 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-26 10:15 ` Joerg Schilling
2005-05-26 12:47 ` [OT] " Alexander E. Patrakov
2005-05-27 10:31 ` Joerg Schilling
[not found] <4847F-8q-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
2005-05-25 22:46 ` OT] " Joerg Schilling
2005-05-25 23:31 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-26 3:45 ` [OT] " Alexander E. Patrakov
2005-05-26 5:06 ` Giuseppe Bilotta
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505261335440.2939@be1.lrz>
2005-05-26 12:33 ` Alexander E. Patrakov
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505261651220.3407@be1.lrz>
2005-05-27 10:44 ` Joerg Schilling
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050521235928.GL4489@stusta.de \
--to=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=omb@bluewin.ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox