[nSLUG] Why you are not seeing software ported to Linux
D G Teed
donald.teed at gmail.com
Wed Jun 22 21:30:08 ADT 2011
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Daniel Morrison <draker at gmail.com> wrote:
> Miguel's post is close to 10 years old (?). Miguel also has a
> reputation for saying things very bluntly, perhaps even overdoing
> things a bit for effect. So we should not spend too long arguing the
> details of his writing.
> On 22 June 2011 16:10, D G Teed <donald.teed at gmail.com> wrote:
> > If I contrast that with my experience installing Solaris 10 on
> > ~10 year old Sun equipment, I've had no hardware/kernel
> > problems, going back to an Ultra 2 from 1999.
> Apples and oranges. Sun (like Apple) has had complete control over the
> hardware platform. Linux never did.
It isn't quite apples and oranges. It is a failure to deliver what is
as supported. It used to work in earlier Debian versions, so it isn't
It is just a question of going beyond the QA standard of "it worked for me".
I believe it (Debian 6 CD for Sparc) works from newer DVD drives only,
but I have not verified. Developers seems to be aware of the flaw
but don't put a high priority on fixing it, which I'd think must be
possible due to past sucess. Similar thing happens with CDROM
images with Redhat 6, while no problem from Redhat 5 CDROM.
It used to work, it becomes broke, and the attitude is the hardware
is too old.
What I am getting at is aiming for a standard, like those in engineering.
Engineers don't build a bridge, drive a car across and declare it is
safe based on the car getting across. But software developers do,
and especially those in the best efforts category of open source,
reverse engineered drivers, wrapper drivers, reverse engineered protocols,
etc. It is the nature of the situation in many cases, but in others
there could be higher standards, and it is particularly demonstrated
when 7 year old hardware can't do things it used to. The changes
have broke things.
> > When a CDROM won't boot Solaris or Windows, I know the
> > drive or media is bad.
> You have an 'or' in there, which means you don't really know anything.
There is another possibility. You don't understand. But this says
a lot about your intentions. You don't seek to find an understanding,
the approach is combative.
Just because it is a mailing list and you can't see my face
doesn't mean it has to go down in a flame war. I'm not
into that culture. I'm just looking to discuss. Sometimes
a question really is a question.
Since you put that statement in there I'm not going to respond
to anything else from your post as it would be a waste of effort.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the nSLUG