[conspire] so much for politeness to nick

[bruce coston]

 Nick Moffitt wrote:

> If anything, an argument could be made that Ubuntu development is being
> thrown over the wall into Debian Experimental, and no effort is being
> made to push that work into Debian Unstable.  But to claim that Ubuntu
> is just clumsily repackaged software from Experimental is wrong in the
> extreme.

It is the former claim I am making, not the latter. The only package I
claimed Ubuntu snagged from Debian Experimental was the Savage driver (and....From: Nick Moffitt ...
Daniel Gimpelevich:
> The only package I claimed Ubuntu snagged from Debian Experimental was
> the Savage driver (and I mistakenly said it was for Gutsy, when it
> went into Feisty). I only made statements of observation ("...have
> existed in Debian only in..."). All the conclusions drawn from what I
> said there were yours.  (Well, yours and Bruce's...)Nick, unless your links say something hidden deeper than I'm willing to go, they are not relevant.

MEPIS did not lightly switch to buntu , specifically they worried about code buntu uses that has not passed from experimental into sid. Much of debian code testing centers on  automatic promotion dependant on passing automated tests run every thursday. 
     I'm not going to check whether code can get to sid from experimental with only automated testing for you. 

     Its rather well known that buntu gets better hd benchmarks because of some code that never got out of debian experimental. Given the MANY suspicious disk partition wipe outs and 1 incident that wiped all linux partitions I'm forced to recommend against buntu and stop testing them, ~"go buy all new drives that work"  reinforces my view of buntu childishness formed from their long neglect eventually addressed of the reality that 90%+ of systems ship with PNP enabled. I don't backup daily expecting weekly emergencies. Things go too bad too often when a buntu shares a drive! Suppossedly this won't happen when everybody uses jfs. I'm not redoing everyones fs just to accomodate buntu! 
Most of my awareness that debian testing exists  comes from the fact that buntu sucks CRITICAL CODE from there. 

How many distro do you multi-boot? Do you test on anything but the nicest hardware ?

The article from Warren you cite mentions the software forking from debian issue, by sticking with CRITICAL CODE that enhances hd performance and wipes linux partitions they also fork away from a large segment of the worlds hard drives and/or filesystems.  

By not even bothering with research we know of 2 pieces of low level software in buntu from experimental and at least 1 causes data loss, thus CRITICAL - all lines of code are not created equal. 

     I will definately recommend the MEPIS beta 1 over any and all buntu because its working great doing this among other things. It didn't cause any disk wipes despite sharing with PCBSD etc. BUT do replace k3b with gnome-baker to avoid the visible bug that prevented me from making my backup, immensely preferable over suddenly needing to restore from a backup that may exist. 

Its reckless when its your drives that don't work out. 

I find the buntu crowd so proud of their choices they lose honesty and like to describe it as "TENDENTION" both as dishonesty from excessive partisanship and the medical term for an undeveloped fetus. 



       
---------------------------------
Luggage? GPS? Comic books? 
Check out fitting  gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/conspire/attachments/20070901/e4f4a01d/attachment.html>