[conspire] Please let the inaccuacies of the ignorant quit spreading, at least here.
jane_ikari at yahoo.com
Thu Sep 6 16:42:35 PDT 2007
I really hoped this had died but folks who don't pay attention feel too special about their opinions. [these comments need insertion, here]
conspire-request at linuxmafia.com wrote: Send conspire mailing list submissions to
conspire at linuxmafia.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World-Wide Web, visit
or, via e-mail, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
conspire-request at linuxmafia.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
conspire-owner at linuxmafia.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of conspire digest..."
1. Re: so much for politeness to nick (Daniel Gimpelevich)
2. $YOUR_FAVOURITE_FILESYSTEM sucks (Rick Moen)
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 19:18:49 +0000 (UTC)
From: Daniel Gimpelevich
Subject: Re: [conspire] so much for politeness to nick
To: conspire at linuxmafia.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 17:16:25 -0700, bruce coston wrote:
> 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.
That only applies to unstable->testing, and tends to err on the side of
caution. Debian practically never does anything that some other distro
hasn't done first, so that they may hopefully do it better.
> I'm not going to check whether code can get to sid from
> experimental with only automated testing for you.
Cannot happen -- by design.
> Its rather well known that buntu gets better hd benchmarks because
> of some code that never got out of debian experimental. Given the
Not sure to which code you're referring, but odds are that it's upstart,
which Nick also mentioned.
> MANY suspicious disk partition wipe outs and 1 incident that wiped
> all linux partitions I'm forced to recommend against buntu and stop
Unrelated issue. I'm appalled that anyone who multi-boots so many
GNU/Linux distros would even think of trusting any partitioning method
other than "Manual" in any distro at all.
[ i used manual and my laptop has 2 linux at a time on it. the "partition wipeouts" happen spontaneously a couple days later for no apparent reason ]
> testing them, ~"go buy all new drives that work" reinforces my
> view of buntu childishness formed from their long neglect
It took you how long to stop buying Western Digital drives?
[I own mostly Maxtor drives, and the wd drives you get back after the return work great! The fact that you do need to return them causes me to always keep ahead of my storage needs. ]
> eventually addressed of the reality that 90%+ of systems ship with
> PNP enabled. I don't backup daily >expecting weekly emergencies.
I assume you're referring to the "PnP OS" option, rather than the
presence of a PnP BIOS. Ubuntu kernels handle this scenario better than
the stock kernels of any distro I've seen.[they do now.] For example, it often makes
Sidux not boot at all.
> Things go too bad too often when a buntu shares a drive!
> Suppossedly this won't happen when everybody uses jfs. I'm not
Sadly, this is an area where Ubuntu is a bit behind the curve. Ubuntu
still insists that ext3 is the best default. Other than obvious
partitioning precautions, *buntu goes out of its way to make sure GRUB
plays nice with everything else on the drive. I've never seen any other
distro even come close to this. [ libranet and sidux have both done that at one point in the past. ]
> redoing everyones fs just to accomodate buntu!
Using JFS would be accommodating Linux, not *buntu.[huh?, when buntu causes wipeouts unless all distro use jfs[one suppossed remedy], the change accomodates buntu vs no buntu on drives ever again!]
> Most of my awareness that debian testing exists comes from the fact
> that buntu sucks CRITICAL CODE from there.
Um, how is that a bad thing?
[gosh, how is wiping out disk partitions a bad thing ? its only listed as a specific no no by debian regarding admission to sid.]
> How many distro do you multi-boot? Do you test on anything but the
> nicest hardware ?
I stopped the multi-boot game and settled on Ubuntu. I still periodically
grab a not-in-immediate-use HD and install something else on it, and never
on the "nicest" hardware. I keep coming back to Ubuntu.[ not practical here despite my tray experiments and what will you do with these huge drives except test extra distro ? ]
> 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.
Major conflation. Please restate. [ no, major point - please pay attention. ]
> 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.
The data loss here is user error, end of story. [claim opposition is lying, r u sbay ?]
> 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.
There's nothing wrong with recommending more than one thing. Also, Calvin
may have been onto something when he recommended gcombust over K3b, rather
> Its reckless when its your drives that don't work out.
It's reckless when you trust software to do what you haven't verified it
to do ahead of time, regardless of what that software is. [ then why does debian consider wiping partitions, post install, a no-no, even for sid - this has been going on for about 18 months and mostly I'm too polite to keep SHOUTING AT THE BUNTU FANBOYS LIKE THEY DESPERATELY DESERVE FOR DAMAGING LINUX LIKE THIS! ]
> 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.
This may actually be more of that "California" thing that Rick was talking
about... [ I really can't care - you acquire a reputation by your actions and going off half cocked about someone insulting your fave distro does not help your reputation.]
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:28:19 -0700
From: Rick Moen
Subject: [conspire] $YOUR_FAVOURITE_FILESYSTEM sucks
To: conspire at linuxmafia.com
Message-ID: <20070905212819.GJ16248 at linuxmafia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Quoting Daniel Gimpelevich (daniel at gimpelevich.san-francisco.ca.us):
[JFS, and sharing of drives among distributions. Mutibooting, I
> Sadly, this is an area where Ubuntu is a bit behind the curve. Ubuntu
> still insists that ext3 is the best default.
Bearing in mind that I don't multiboot, I'm still of the mind that ext3
has, over the last few years, been the safest (of available journaling
FS options) for data protection, in the general case. It's the best
debugged [unless, as happened to my with a "distribution release" once where they had grabbed daily snapshot full o bugs] on account of good maintenance and very wide testing, has
mature and well-designed fsck and other ancillary utilities, tops out at
reasonable sizes (say I, having not gotten that exabyte hard drive yet),
and is designed defensively with the failure modes of commodity PC
hardware in mind.
I'm delighted that you two have a high opinion of JFS [ I don't and if you infer I do when I state I won't use it your nuts, " you can always tell the pioneers by all the arrows in their backs" ] , because that
raises some hope that you'll do all that great pioneering QA work that I
always appreciate someone _other than me_ doing.
> There's nothing wrong with recommending more than one thing.
>> 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.
> This may actually be more of that "California" thing that Rick was talking
I think I may have lost track of what this concerns. Bruce had made
some mostly-unparseable and vague reference to inveighing against GNOME
HIG provisions, right?
[wrong, I hope the buntu does not get as bad as the gnome fanboys with their, now thoroughly debunked, "human interface guidelines" ]
My referenced wording must have been that bit about "the rationalisation
stage required following all screw-ups". It's the oddest thing, and
just might be yet another bit of damage to the national culture that
California must one day answer for: You point out that party A has
messed up, citing reasonably objective evidence of same.
Party A's response _could_ reasonably be one of the following:
o "You're mistaken about your facts." Refutation follows.
o "Your implication of wrongful effect is in error" (the "so what?"
o "You are correct, but other good effects outweight that" (cited).
However, the classic California-culture response is none of those,
but rather an hours-long digression onto protestation of good motives.
Which is of course completely irrelevant to the point -- and raises the
reasonable suspicion that some arbitrary number of future screw-ups will
be justified the same way.
...[having said that, I note the horrid air quality from the 2 fires and will not hold oxygen deprived responses against anyone.]
Building a website is a piece of cake.
Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the conspire