At Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:23:49 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:59:58 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 11:34 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote: > > > It's pretty normal to see opponents of a decision like this complain > > > loudly when it lands on their system, whereas the silent majority in > > > favour will be happy to see the change finally implemented but reluctant > > > to stir up the discussion again. > > > > > > I don't think new arguments are brought to the discussion, just new > > > people, who are temporarily inconvened by a change towards sanity. > > > > Nice emotive response, especially the subtle but unsubstantiated 'silent > > majority in favour' bit -- but you forgot the part where you were > > supposed to actually point out a tangible benefit which is achieved by > > breaking compatibility like this. > > > > And no, reducing the size of /usr/bin by a tiny fraction isn't really a > > worthwhile benefit -- in reality, the 'silent majority' really couldn't > > give a monkey's left testicle about that, and breakage caused by the > > gratuitous change _far_ outweighs any minuscule improvement. > > Reducing /usr/bin in size was totally worthwhile. Maybe not to you, but > to the silent majority I am a proud member of, it was. (I'm not saying > that the path that was taken to get there was optimal, just that the > goal was sound.) > > I just can't think of any other tool which installs over 100 binaries > (or scripts, that's the same) in /usr/bin. Can you? netpbm has almost 300 in /usr/bin. Takashi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
