On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 19:36, Matthias Saou wrote:
> > Eek.  Maybe it's just me, but I don't think that's a good idea.
> > Outputting a message in %post and providing a README of some kind would
> > be better, as well as perhaps adding a note in %description.
>
> Why "Eek"? :-)
> If no /dev/dvd exists, it'll create it.
> If /dev/dvd exists, it won't touch it.
I assume that you won't %ghost or remove these and the modules.conf
change on uninstall, though.  So people who are installing this RPM and
are unfortunate enough to have a DVD drive (or just an ordinary CD,
non-DVD drive) that doesn't support DMA will be left with a system
without a working CD drive, even after removing the RPM.  And without
ever knowing what struck them.  You can't remove the DMA setting from
modules.conf either unless you're sure that ogle added it there and
nothing else needs it.
The /dev stuff isn't that dangerous, but the modules.conf change can
be.  That's why "Eek" :)
> If someone installs ogle (a DVD player), I'm assuming the hardware is
> recent enough for software playback and that the drive is a DVD-ROM... all
> of them support DMA! But since that change requires a reboot or a manual
> change, I'm still hesitating to integrate it :-/
A worthy goal...
> My goal is to allow users to install a DVD player through synaptic and play
> DVDs in no time. Outputting a message in the %post section of a package is
> always a bad idea, putting the tip in the %description sounds good though.
How about splitting the creation of the symlinks and modules.conf
modifications into a separate RPM?
--
\/ille Skyttä
ville.skytta at iki.fi
_______________________________________________
RPM-List mailing list <RPM-List@freshrpms.net>
http://lists.freshrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

> On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> --]How likely are you to change someone's mind by being
> --]rude and disrespectful to them? Is this how to win friends and
> influence
> --]people?
>
> Point the first, I doubt if they are trying to change Rumsy's mind but
> rather to show others that there is a vocal and violent opposition to his
> views. With such flagrant showings of opposition there would be more
> coverage of the opposing ideas and thus the spreading of the dissenting
> meme. A viri need not comply with the wishes of the attacked host, rather
> the host had better make some antibodies or learn to adapt.
>
> Point the second. Historicaly the "in yer face" mode of confrontation has
> been used to gain popular support and to grow from seeds "grass roots"
> movements. Witness the big bold "in yer face" signature of Hancock on the
> "in yer  face" Declaration of the american colonies to the governing
> powers of england. Witness also the chicago seven, Others will follow in
> examplare  form upon digging.
>
> Now point the third, is it annoying? Yes, and if your annoyed then the "in
> yer facers" have done thier job. Sad to say the polite persnikiters are
> teh very fule the "in yer facers" hope to ignite. If your burning, your
> being used.
>
> Pointed the personal...The politics of the polite are more often the
> refuge of backstabings,  closed mouth recourlessness and hypocritcal
> behavoirs. Id rather hear what those who oppose me have to say than
> quietly be knifed by the slow hand of the coward.
>
>
>
> Seek not the polite or impolite but rather the reasons why.
>
>
> -tom
Good points all but they don't apply in this case.  Someone is speaking and
a group of selfish bastards only interested in getting their rocks off are
trying to shout him down (they are doing it because 'it's good for the
soul'. Kind like Chuckie Manson doing the stuff he did cause 'it was good
for his soul'). Unprincipled and evil. It's got nothing to do with throwing
tea in the harbor or the DoI.
Bill