[arch-general] change in mount behaviour?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 11:07 +0000, Mauro Santos wrote:
> On 29-01-2012 10:50, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> 
> > I just ask that upgrades don't break a working machine, caused by
> > unneeded dependencies. If a studio used GNOME, than an upgrade shouldn't
> > add PA and break the machine.
> 
> Deploying untested updates/upgrades on production machines is asking for
> trouble, regardless of what is getting updated/upgraded.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.

Full ACK! For a production machine everybody should make backups, real
snapshots, that means not sync the backup, but to keep several backups.
Upgrades never should be done during a production.

But backups have to be done sometimes and then they shouldn't break a
machine, caused by forcing to add dependencies, that shouldn't be
dependencies.

On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 11:58 +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Ralf Mardorf
> <ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net> wrote:
> >> > I'm sure all
> >> > Linux installs MUST be ready to use out of the box for
professional audio
> >> > users. after all, the same is true for the other operating
systems.
> >
> > I just ask that upgrades don't break a working machine, caused by
> > unneeded dependencies. If a studio used GNOME, than an upgrade
shouldn't
> > add PA and break the machine.
> > Only add dependencies if they are needed. PA isn't needed, it's
> > optional. If upstream add it, it might be allowed to explain, why it
> > isn't good to do so.
> 
> Sounds like possibly valid concerns. But this is not something to
> discuss here. Please contact gnome and/or pulseaudio if you have
> issues. We just package their software, we don't decide their
> priorities or policies.
> 
> And I think this discussion has gone on for way too long...

Passing from pillar to post. A community should think about marginalized
groups too. Where ever WE try to explain the problem, it ends like this,
or more worse with assumptions similar to those from Oon-Ee Ng. If
anybody should have diss somebody named Lennart, it's not fair to put
the blame on me.

I switched to Arch, because the distros I used before already become
hard to use. Talking about PA here, is to prevent Arch to become hard to
use too. From that standpoint it belongs to a discussion at some Arch
mailing list. If Arch-"general" isn't the right place, it would be nice
to add a list Arch-"discussion", Arch-"sandbox" or what ever.

0,02€,

Ralf

PS: I tried to be quiet, but since others continued with claims that are
wrong, I couldn't. Audio users tried to explain that WE experienced
"things" as borked and people who never have done audio productions send
links and claimed that we don't know the facts. Our experiences aren't
experiences, but hearsay only. Is enlightenment unwanted?