Re: [E-devel] Re: E CVS: libs/ewd smugg

[<ra...@ra...>]

On 10 Apr, Ben Ford scribbled:
>  ra...@ra... wrote:
>  
> > no - this sint what i'm talking about. what i'm talking abotu is that
> > peolpe insit on compilign when they shoudl sue binaries tosave time and
> > effort. i'm almost tempted to make  (i say almost) E closed soruce
> > (wuth soruce only going to people who make packages for systems) to
> > mitigate this insistance on compiling everything yourself. i wont do it
> > - but what i am saying is i feel strongly that peolpe just dont make
> > usre of the work we do for them and do it themselves then come crying
> > to us when it gets a little hard to compile things even thought we went
> > to the effort of making packages for them to save them this work.
> > 
>  
>  Sorry, I have to stick my nose in here.
>  
>  Not everybody uses RedHat.  Do we need to go over it again?  Not 
>  everybody uses RedHat.  And not everybody uses Debian either.  Some 
>  people don't want packages.  I happen to be one of them.  I like to 
>  compile stuff.  I like to see what kind of error messages I get.  I like 
>  to see what compile time options there are.  I do *NOT* like waiting for 
>  RedHat, or Debian, or Mandrake, or Caldera, or Slackware  . . .  to 
>  update my packages.

we make those packaged FOR you - you dont HAVE to wait. just download
them. if its an architectur ehtat doesnt have binary packages it smuch
faster to dowloand the binary packages and install them or do the
apt-gt thanto conwdload and then wait for a compile that mary or may
not work.

>  I am most certainly *not* an E developer, I just lurk here to keep up on 
>  progress.  But have you ever seen me come "crying to you for help"?  E 

oh no- YOU havent.. but i see it daily on #e and look atthe e message
board son sf - look at edevelop's history when we do a release and
peole downlaod it ... they al compile it and most have no idea what
they are doing and cant read compiler errors - if you dont know what
hey mean or wont be able to cope.. do it the easy way. if you choose to
compile.. you are on your own. i'm not saying that you ben stop -but i
don't want people complaingin theres too many libs to copmpile bwaaah
bwaaah i'm too lame to keep track fo dependancies because i'm so 31337
that i have to compile everyhtign myself but i cant understand compiler
errors or track dependancies so i have to waste developers and other
peoples times to have them handhold me thru compiling something" - THAT
is what annoys the crap out of me. it wastes MY time for somehting i
SPENT time to solve their problems by making packages. they coudl at
least READ the spec files - at least rpm --rebuild if the arch is wrong
or they want it built for theri dist (mandrake, suse, etc.) the rpms
tell u "need this package instaleld to build..." and the package is
there.

>  is not a hard package to compile.  It never has been.  That is part of 
>  the reason I use it.  Don't take that away from me.  Source happens, 
>  people have been releasing source since long before any of you started 
>  coding.  Many projects do source releases only and *still* offer no 
>  help.  If you can't find it in the FAQ, then wait for your distro.

thats what i'm saying - i wish peole whould eithe r go away quitely and
leanr like I and many others liek you did - and dont bother us if they
insist on compilign things - otherwise dont complainand use the
binaries we made for u. if its a new arch/system etc. then its valid to
have to compile - but then make binaries and provide them for others to
use to save them time...

>  And Raster, that guy you just told to download the Imlib2 rpm, he was 
>  running Slackware!!!  Slackware doesn't use rpms (yes, there are still a 
>  few distros that don't) and alien *rapes* rpms.  That package you 
>  provided him was not an option.  It will toast his system worse than if 
>  he compiled it by hand, and then he's gonna come crying to you for help.

i guess hes got problerms then if he chooses nto to install rpm on the
system and rpm --rebuild the src.rpm - that works just fine. i did this
a long time ago on slack3.0 -  instaleld rpm then i coudl build rpms on
the system.

>  Please don't take this route.  No offense, and I do appreciate your 
>  time, but I don't want a binary package.

i'm not forcing you. but i AM saying that i'm sick of my time being
wasted by epoel who REFUSE to use what help we alreayd give them and
then want it form us induvidiually one by one.

>  -b
>  

-- 
--------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------------
The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)    ra...@ra...     ra...@va...
VA Linux Systems                    ra...@de...
Mobile Phone: +1 408 887 3163	    Work Phone: +1 510 687 7069