One would actually land in front of where you jumped from (assuming the direction of rotation is considered forward).
Consider this:-
You are standing inside the outer wall of the rotating ring, and both you and the ring are rotating at x rads/sec. It may help to think of this in terms of metres/sec, and as we know the circumference we work out you are travelling at (an arbitary) 2 metres/sec.
If you now jump 1 metre from the surface you are standing on you are still travelling at 2 metres/sec, and as there is no external force to slow you down (ignoring air resistance, assuming space suits were not required) you continue at this speed.
But at your new position, 1 metre nearer the centre than your old position, the circumference of the ring is less.
If the circumference is less, but the speed is the same, you will complete one revolution in less time. Or to put it another way, if the cicumference is less, but the speed is the same, in a given amount of time you will move further round the cicumference.
...All of my work is in/home/me. If that gets hosed, I lose everything...
Well, you could do what I do.
Have a seperate user for internet related activity, say "webuser" for example.
This user has no shell so no one can log in as "webuser".
My browser (Galeon - better than Firefox IMHO), IM, p2p cients etc. are all run as webuser and accessed via sudo using the no password option.
This means it is all completely transparent to the user, of course. I click on the browser icon or whatever and up pops Galeon running as webuser. The good thing is webuser cannot access my home dir, so if something goes horribly wrong all I lose is my bookmarks (which I have backed up anyway).
The only downside is that when I download stuff it's in webusers home dir so I have to manually move it if I want it in mine. Still, thats no big deal as I have access to webusers home dir as my normal user.
But have you read the 54 page contract you have to sign to get a SlippyMotors car?
It turns out you don't own it, your just renting it.
If you change the tyres you have to phone them before it will start again.
If you change the engine you have to buy - sorry, rent - it again.
They can come and change any part of it whenever they like, even if your half way through a journey, and if it doesn't run afterwards your SOL.
You're only allowed to keep it in one Garage.
You're not allowed to look at how it works.
No matter where you want to go today, it will only allow you to go places allowed by the Drivers Rights Management system.
I know this is Gross, but I'm sure there was a bit left over.
At the other end of the scale there are thousands of bands, without recording contracts, playing local venues. They dont make any money at all except from playing live and merchandise.
...I like how you actually include the part in the first quote, but fail to hilight it...
Good God, where to start...
I included the whole quote as this is Stephen Donaldson telling us the capabilities of the zone implant through Angus's dealings with Morn. I highlighted the part that was in contention, the rest of the quote wasn't in contention so it didn't need highlighting. The point of including the quote was to show that he had a choice. Look at it again, he would control her actions perhaps by taking control of her body or perhaps by exerting neural pressure. The zone implant was capable of both.
...They can change... willingness to obey someone's orders...
This is not the case, either. One of the overriding themes in the books is the anger and frustration felt carrying out instructions against ones will, but being unable to resist.
A few more quotes on this theme:-
...As he tapped the buttons on the remote he rasped "Sit up"...She sat up on the edge of the berth...
...The control compelled her, she didn't need to watch what she was doing...
...Moving like a robot, responsive to nothing but the implants functions...
The point of Angus's internal computer was to control the zone implant. He was being sent away from the people controlling him. The computer was able to control the implant according to a program designed by the people controlling him. It was replacing a person.
...And the book can call whatever is Angus 'zone implants' all they want...
You do know this is not a news report? If the book says it's a zone implant thats what it is. It is whatever the author wants it to be. If you disagree take it up with him.
I suggest you re-read the books as your recollection of them doesn't appear to be as good as you think it is. And that will have the added benefit of allowing you to quote a passage to back up your stance.
...With the zone implant he could make her do anything he wanted; perhaps by taking control of her body and directing it as he wished; perhaps by exerting neural pressure - pain and pleasure strong enough to coerce her...
So it is indeed more than just emotional control.
A brief scan of the last book reveals this:-
...Angus Thermopyle awoke the instant Morn said his name. Without transition his zone implants imposed new conditions on him...
So even though Angus was a cyborg, he was controlled by zone implants.
I remember Angus having cigarettes stubbed out on his tounge, and then eating the stub. It caused him a great deal of discomfort, but he was unable to stop. I think there was a bit more to it than just emotional control.
Close, The story hinges on the use of a "zone implant", a mind control device. I'm sure the perversions (sex and torture) are a reasonable facsimile of how people would behave given absolute control over someone else, and no peers to intervene. It is not over a day or so, though, more like years.
...Statically linked binaries are not ideal. It is a workaround for the issues I've outlined...
It's not a *workaround*. It's a perfectly acceptable and valid means of distribution. It has the downside that the program will be larger, and you may end up with redundant copies of libraries on your system, but an upside of guaranteeing your program will work whatever is already on the system. It's a trade off. Understandably, most people prefer to save space and time and use dynamically linked libraries.
...The fact that you can compile a program and work with any distribution is irrelevent...
So the fact that a program will work with any distribution is irrelevent?
...Why include the GNU tools?...
Ask Richard Stallman.
...All you really need is a shell. And even that is just a program...
The kernel is just a program, too.
...I'll accept any technical definition of LInux as an OS that you'd like...
If you accept my definition of linux the OS, then the different distributions are not like different OS's, but an OS that comes with different versions of some programs.
...For most practical purposes Redhat and Debian, for example, may as well be different OS's. Especially when it comes to commercial software which might only "support" one or the other...
Opera, for example, offer packages for various distributions, plus a statically linked version which will work on any distribution. Open Office only offer one download to work on any distribution. If you compile a program yourself it will work in your distribution, whatever it is. So saying...reality demands that they be treated as [different OS's]... is simply not true.
...In the WIndows world it is the opposite. Windows 98 and Windows NT are different OS's, but software venders can write their software and distribute binaries as if they weren't...
As I am sure you are aware, this is not the case for all Windows software. And where it is you still have to have the right versions of any Dll's required. Of course, sometimes they are provided, and overwrite any Dll's with the same name, which may break other programs.
...Sure, but who is going to do that?...
I can't imagine anyone doing it, it would be pointless. But it could be done, unlike trying to change Windows 98 into XP which are different OS's.
...If you want to install the latests verson of KDE, for example, you really need a package that is built for your particular version of a particular distribution...
You don't need it, it is a convinience. It is perfectly possible to compile a vanilla KDE on any distribution. But by doing so you would lose out on that distributions customisation, and the further convinience of easy updates.
I think you and I may have a different idea of what constitutes an OS. For me it is (in the case of a Linux distribution) the Linux kernel and the GNU tools that make it work, nothing more. Everything else are programs running on the OS.
The problems with using distribution Y's package on distribution X are that:-
They may use different versions of the same library.
-Different versions of the same library do not make for a different OS.
If package X needs Y some distributions may incude it in their package with X and others will include it in another package, or it's own package.
-Obviously this is an inconvinience, but doesn't make them seperate OS's.
Sometimes a distribution will customise a program, such as KDE, by adding their own menu, icons etc:
-This is still only a program running on the OS, it doesn't change the OS.
Of course, you may disagree as to what constitutes an OS, in which case we could go round in circles for ever...
...Like I said, for most intents and purposes, Linux distributions are different OS's...
It's still not true though.
Packaging programs in a different wrapper, and/or including different parts of the program in the wrapper do not make them different OS's.
With a little (well, OK, a lot) of work you could change any distribution into any other, maintaining a working system throughout the change.
...If you want to install the latests verson of KDE, for example, you really need a package that is built for your particular version of a particular distribution...
Or you could compile the vanilla KDE source on any distribution and have it work.
Do you think you can only be a KDE developer if you use distribution "X", or they develop several versions in parallel to cater for their developers preferences?
...You claimed portage was well thought of, and I agreed...
Glad we agree on something.
...I wasn't trying to show that nobody had problems with other distros, I was trying to show that people did have a problem with the reliability of Gentoo...
But it is the fact that these problems are much more likely to happen with Gentoo that you have singularly failed to establish.
...While I don't deny that Debian has problems, the link you provided doesn't do a good job of demonstrating it...
So the words "It's a debian problem" with a link to the bug report doesn't demonstrate a problem with Debian?
...You're being intellectually dishonest...
Is that like when you said...the link you provided doesn't do a good job of demonstrating it...?
...We can disagree about the reliability of Gentoo, because there's no way for me to prove conclusively that it's worse...
There is no need to prove it conclusively, You just had to show *something* that would back up your claims.
...(though it is my informed opinion that it is)...
You don't appear to understand what an informed opinion is. It is not a survey of one. If it was truly an informed opinion you could have passed the information on. After all, thats all I've asked for.
...but in the peripheral issues such as what can be infered from my links and how meaningful Google numbers are, you have demonstrated a lack of understanding of statistics...
There were no statistics in your links, or maybe you lack an understanding of what statistics are? As for my links, what's your point? You made a case, not me. I asked you to back up your claims, and you couldn't. Even if I made those numbers up it still wouldn't help your case. As it is there is an indication there that Gentoo is no worse than any other distribution. Had it been otherwise it would have added weight to your argument, even if it didn't prove it.
...and you have been contradicting yourself...
Now your just making stuff up.
...I will therefore not continue this discussion, because I don't think you can participate in a way that will be productive...
I don't think that's what you mean, is it? You wont continue because you have nothing to add. Your entire argument rests on your own personal experience, and as one who is so au fait with statistics, you will know thats going to skew the results a bit.
...It's the policy I have an issue with, not portage...
Which still has nothing to do with the original point.
...Length of time of Debian's existence and larger user base are one of the things that make your Google comparison dubious...
As pointed out in my post, to which you have just replied, there are distributions that have been around for less time than Gentoo with more requests for help, and the user base works to the larger distributions advantage. If a question has been asked already the answer is (hopefully) there.
...There are other things for other distros, for example the different users that Ubuntu attracts...
Ah, still twisting and turning.
You have to read between the lines. no you wont get exact figures here, but if one distribution was so much worse than the others it would show somewhere. But it doesn't.
...I used the Internet to establish that there existed people that had a problem with the reliability of Gentoo, not establish numbers...
But you would have if you could. I can establish there exists people that have a problem with the reliability of any distribution you care to name. 2003 seems to be a year you favour so try this. I bet this person ranted on and on how this was by far the worst distribution he had ever used. It's probably the policies, nothing wrong with apt. Something more up to date? Here you are. And of course Debian never causes people problems.
So what does this prove? Only that no distribution is immune to problems, not that they are significantly worse than any other. Numbers would do that. Surely with such an awful distribution there is a plethora of sites for you to choose from, like this one. Oh, hang on, they quite like it.
...As no one has done any studies, none of us has anything better...
Well, I don't know about you, but I have the Internet.
...But the point you're missing is...
No, I'm not. You might like to try and change this exchange into "apt is better than portage" or whatever. Understandable as your position is, at best, a personal grievance, but that was not your original point. Nor the one I have issue with.
...Debian has been around a lot longer than most of the other distros...
Not your best argument, as Gentoo has been around longer than Ubuntu or Kubuntu, and yet...
I can see where your coming from, though. You tried to find something to back your claims up and managed two irrelevant pages, so now you consider the Internet to be unsuitable for the task.
...Based on that sample, Gentoo is much worse than the average...
There you go again. You have an extraordinary inabiliy to back up your claims with other than personal anecdotes,
...You're confusing the package management system with the distro...
No, I'm not. However it is part of Gentoo, and one of the defining parts. If you re-read my post you will see that I said...Slightly off topic, but this is why portage...
...You're right; it's very unscientific. Particularly given the dramatic differences in the numbers of users those various platforms have....
But still, you would have thought Gentoo would have been right up there with the best of them, seeing as it's so much worse than the others.
To add a little more perspective for you, lets include the user base from this survey.
Mandriva - 17.9%
Suse - 16.2%
Debian - 7.7%
Ubuntu - 3.4%
Gentoo - 3.4%
Kubuntu - 0.9%
So Ubuntu and Gentoo should have the same number of complaints. Oh no, they don't.
Debian has two and a quarter times the user base, so it should have two and a quarter times the number of complaints. Oh no, it's more than that.
Kbuntu should have a quarter...
Looks like Gentoo isn't much worse than average after all.
...If it were something wrong with me, I would consider it strange that I have used Linux distros like Slackware, Fedora, RHEL, Suse, and Debian, and other OSes like OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and Solaris without similar problems...
Don't take things so personally. If you are doing something wrong it doesn't mean there is something wrong with you. Nobody is infallible.
...Mandrake Expatriate Syndrome:
"You sometimes see Gentoo users talk about how their system helps them easily keep all their packages up to date. Of course, the downside to this is that with the Gentoo system, you have a QA department of one. You are really the first and last person in the package testing system. I know that even with Debian sid, sometimes packages get held back for a bit so they can be better tested before releasing them to a ton of users. Even with that, sometimes Debian sid packages have problems that the package maintainer didn't see (or simply made a mistake). On Gentoo, you are either stuck with potentially untested programs running on your system (or possibly beta/CVS programs), or not upgrading."...
Nice to post from someones personal vendetta against Gentoo, or more particularly Gentoo users. From 2003.
I'm sure you spotted the error with this, but in case you didn't:- It ignores the fact that packages are masked, which means the package is, in effect, in beta. It is your choice whether to use it or not. Some people see this as a benefit. You will also note there is a lot of talk here about problems with Mandrake, rather diluting your assertion that...the probability of problems with Gentoo is much higher than with other distros.... Since this was 2003 though I'm sure Mandrake has improved.
...This works well for highly-used software (such as Apache), but less so for little-used software
I suppose things like KDE and the kernel qualify as "little-used software" by this definition, but it's sufficient to establish that people other than me have a problem with the QA...
I wouldn't have thought so as:-
Gentoo uses vanilla KDE.
You can use a vanilla kernel, a Gentoo kernel or another kernel.
The important bit in this quote is...the difficulties experienced in past years from the "stable" branch have dissipated...
...Not only do they exist, but all the major distros have them...
Are you suggesting I implied they didn't???
...The other claim I was taking issue with was your claim that there are fewer annoyances. I suppose that depends on how you define annoyances, but as I define "breakage that I'm not responsible for" as an annoyance, I'd say Gentoo has it...
Every distribution has "breakages your not responsible for", and Gentoo is no different in that respect. However, you stated that:-
...things were always breaking...
...have to crawl through forums every other weekend just to keep the thing running...
...These are examples of things I experienced regularly...
...the probability of problems with Gentoo is much higher than with other distros...
The links you posted do not imply that this is a common experience. Indeed, if any distribution had this as a common experience for it's users it would be a lot easier to find links lambasting it.
I understand you don't like Gentoo, and you had problems with it, but I like it and, along with many other users, don't have problems with it. I can't comment on your particular case, obviously, any more than you can on mine. But the question is still there. Why did you have so many problems that your installation was unusable, yet mine has gone through kernel upgrades, portage upgrades, a gcc upgrade, changing from the monolith
...I did. Those are just the examples that came to mind...
I know you did, I said so in my reply to you. If you hadn't I wouldn't have been able to say it was strange.
...It's not that unusual...
Yes it is, thats my point. Look around in discussions where Gentoo pops up as a subject. There are many reasons why people dislike Gentoo, but Gentoo being unreliable or flakey is not one of them. If this was as common as you are trying to make out it would have been easy to link to a source, which I notice you didn't.
...there are plenty of people that don't care for Gentoo...
This isn't in dispute, only your assertion that "the probability of problems with Gentoo is much higher than with other distros" is.
...That's certainly not true. I've used most of the other major distros and they all had a reasonably easy update mechanism...
Actually, it is true. But that doesn't mean there are no "reasonably easy update mechanisms" in other distributions.
The strange thing is you say things were *always* breaking, and that you *regularly* experienced problems.
Judging from the response of other people and going by my own Gentoo installation this is unusual. Not that there have never been problems, but one of the reasons people like Gentoo is that once it has been set up it is a lot less hassle to keep up to date than other distributions, and has fewer annoyances.
...the probability of problems with Gentoo is much higher than with other distros...
I really can't see how you came to this conclusion, It's certainly not something I've heard or read anywhere else, and I'm sure you're not going to base this on one installation, so could you link to your sources? I've always had the impression that portage was considered one of the best package management systems out there.
Slashdot Mirror
Besides, when did smoke or salt become a vegetable or spice?
Bacon.
Consider this:-
You are standing inside the outer wall of the rotating ring, and both you and the ring are rotating at x rads/sec. It may help to think of this in terms of metres/sec, and as we know the circumference we work out you are travelling at (an arbitary) 2 metres/sec.
If you now jump 1 metre from the surface you are standing on you are still travelling at 2 metres/sec, and as there is no external force to slow you down (ignoring air resistance, assuming space suits were not required) you continue at this speed.
But at your new position, 1 metre nearer the centre than your old position, the circumference of the ring is less.
If the circumference is less, but the speed is the same, you will complete one revolution in less time. Or to put it another way, if the cicumference is less, but the speed is the same, in a given amount of time you will move further round the cicumference.
Well, you could do what I do.
Have a seperate user for internet related activity, say "webuser" for example.
This user has no shell so no one can log in as "webuser".
My browser (Galeon - better than Firefox IMHO), IM, p2p cients etc. are all run as webuser and accessed via sudo using the no password option.
This means it is all completely transparent to the user, of course. I click on the browser icon or whatever and up pops Galeon running as webuser. The good thing is webuser cannot access my home dir, so if something goes horribly wrong all I lose is my bookmarks (which I have backed up anyway).
The only downside is that when I download stuff it's in webusers home dir so I have to manually move it if I want it in mine. Still, thats no big deal as I have access to webusers home dir as my normal user.
It turns out you don't own it, your just renting it.
If you change the tyres you have to phone them before it will start again.
If you change the engine you have to buy - sorry, rent - it again.
They can come and change any part of it whenever they like, even if your half way through a journey, and if it doesn't run afterwards your SOL.
You're only allowed to keep it in one Garage.
You're not allowed to look at how it works.
No matter where you want to go today, it will only allow you to go places allowed by the Drivers Rights Management system.
There may be more, I'm only up to page 2...
the top earner
seemed to do OK from touring.I don't really see your point. If I sang in local venues I wouldn't get paid at all, so you are better than me but not good enough to make it pay.
Just because you decide to do something doesn't entitle you to make money from it.
Some may disagree.
The top twenty grossing tours from 2005
I know this is Gross, but I'm sure there was a bit left over.
At the other end of the scale there are thousands of bands, without recording contracts, playing local venues. They dont make any money at all except from playing live and merchandise.
Good God, where to start...
I included the whole quote as this is Stephen Donaldson telling us the capabilities of the zone implant through Angus's dealings with Morn. I highlighted the part that was in contention, the rest of the quote wasn't in contention so it didn't need highlighting. The point of including the quote was to show that he had a choice. Look at it again, he would control her actions perhaps by taking control of her body or perhaps by exerting neural pressure. The zone implant was capable of both.
This is not the case, either. One of the overriding themes in the books is the anger and frustration felt carrying out instructions against ones will, but being unable to resist.
A few more quotes on this theme:-
The point of Angus's internal computer was to control the zone implant. He was being sent away from the people controlling him. The computer was able to control the implant according to a program designed by the people controlling him. It was replacing a person.
You do know this is not a news report? If the book says it's a zone implant thats what it is. It is whatever the author wants it to be. If you disagree take it up with him.
I suggest you re-read the books as your recollection of them doesn't appear to be as good as you think it is. And that will have the added benefit of allowing you to quote a passage to back up your stance.
So it is indeed more than just emotional control.
A brief scan of the last book reveals this:-
So even though Angus was a cyborg, he was controlled by zone implants.
I remember Angus having cigarettes stubbed out on his tounge, and then eating the stub. It caused him a great deal of discomfort, but he was unable to stop. I think there was a bit more to it than just emotional control.
Close, The story hinges on the use of a "zone implant", a mind control device. I'm sure the perversions (sex and torture) are a reasonable facsimile of how people would behave given absolute control over someone else, and no peers to intervene. It is not over a day or so, though, more like years.
Cool. I've never had a stalker before.
It's not a *workaround*. It's a perfectly acceptable and valid means of distribution. It has the downside that the program will be larger, and you may end up with redundant copies of libraries on your system, but an upside of guaranteeing your program will work whatever is already on the system. It's a trade off. Understandably, most people prefer to save space and time and use dynamically linked libraries.
So the fact that a program will work with any distribution is irrelevent?
Ask Richard Stallman.
The kernel is just a program, too.
If you accept my definition of linux the OS, then the different distributions are not like different OS's, but an OS that comes with different versions of some programs.
Opera, for example, offer packages for various distributions, plus a statically linked version which will work on any distribution. Open Office only offer one download to work on any distribution. If you compile a program yourself it will work in your distribution, whatever it is. So saying ...reality demands that they be treated as [different OS's]... is simply not true.
As I am sure you are aware, this is not the case for all Windows software. And where it is you still have to have the right versions of any Dll's required. Of course, sometimes they are provided, and overwrite any Dll's with the same name, which may break other programs.
I can't imagine anyone doing it, it would be pointless. But it could be done, unlike trying to change Windows 98 into XP which are different OS's.
You don't need it, it is a convinience. It is perfectly possible to compile a vanilla KDE on any distribution. But by doing so you would lose out on that distributions customisation, and the further convinience of easy updates.
I think you and I may have a different idea of what constitutes an OS. For me it is (in the case of a Linux distribution) the Linux kernel and the GNU tools that make it work, nothing more. Everything else are programs running on the OS.
The problems with using distribution Y's package on distribution X are that:-
They may use different versions of the same library. -Different versions of the same library do not make for a different OS. If package X needs Y some distributions may incude it in their package with X and others will include it in another package, or it's own package. -Obviously this is an inconvinience, but doesn't make them seperate OS's. Sometimes a distribution will customise a program, such as KDE, by adding their own menu, icons etc: -This is still only a program running on the OS, it doesn't change the OS.Of course, you may disagree as to what constitutes an OS, in which case we could go round in circles for ever...
It's still not true though.
Packaging programs in a different wrapper, and/or including different parts of the program in the wrapper do not make them different OS's.
With a little (well, OK, a lot) of work you could change any distribution into any other, maintaining a working system throughout the change.
Or you could compile the vanilla KDE source on any distribution and have it work.
Do you think you can only be a KDE developer if you use distribution "X", or they develop several versions in parallel to cater for their developers preferences?
Glad we agree on something.
But it is the fact that these problems are much more likely to happen with Gentoo that you have singularly failed to establish.
So the words "It's a debian problem" with a link to the bug report doesn't demonstrate a problem with Debian?
Is that like when you said ...the link you provided doesn't do a good job of demonstrating it...?
There is no need to prove it conclusively, You just had to show *something* that would back up your claims.
You don't appear to understand what an informed opinion is. It is not a survey of one. If it was truly an informed opinion you could have passed the information on. After all, thats all I've asked for.
There were no statistics in your links, or maybe you lack an understanding of what statistics are? As for my links, what's your point? You made a case, not me. I asked you to back up your claims, and you couldn't. Even if I made those numbers up it still wouldn't help your case. As it is there is an indication there that Gentoo is no worse than any other distribution. Had it been otherwise it would have added weight to your argument, even if it didn't prove it.
Now your just making stuff up.
I don't think that's what you mean, is it? You wont continue because you have nothing to add. Your entire argument rests on your own personal experience, and as one who is so au fait with statistics, you will know thats going to skew the results a bit.
Which still has nothing to do with the original point.
As pointed out in my post, to which you have just replied, there are distributions that have been around for less time than Gentoo with more requests for help, and the user base works to the larger distributions advantage. If a question has been asked already the answer is (hopefully) there.
Ah, still twisting and turning.
You have to read between the lines. no you wont get exact figures here, but if one distribution was so much worse than the others it would show somewhere. But it doesn't.
But you would have if you could. I can establish there exists people that have a problem with the reliability of any distribution you care to name. 2003 seems to be a year you favour so try this. I bet this person ranted on and on how this was by far the worst distribution he had ever used. It's probably the policies, nothing wrong with apt. Something more up to date? Here you are. And of course Debian never causes people problems.
So what does this prove? Only that no distribution is immune to problems, not that they are significantly worse than any other. Numbers would do that. Surely with such an awful distribution there is a plethora of sites for you to choose from, like this one. Oh, hang on, they quite like it.
Well, I don't know about you, but I have the Internet.
No, I'm not. You might like to try and change this exchange into "apt is better than portage" or whatever. Understandable as your position is, at best, a personal grievance, but that was not your original point. Nor the one I have issue with.
Not your best argument, as Gentoo has been around longer than Ubuntu or Kubuntu, and yet...
I can see where your coming from, though. You tried to find something to back your claims up and managed two irrelevant pages, so now you consider the Internet to be unsuitable for the task.
There you go again. You have an extraordinary inabiliy to back up your claims with other than personal anecdotes,
No, I'm not. However it is part of Gentoo, and one of the defining parts. If you re-read my post you will see that I said ...Slightly off topic, but this is why portage...
But still, you would have thought Gentoo would have been right up there with the best of them, seeing as it's so much worse than the others.
To add a little more perspective for you, lets include the user base from this survey.
So Ubuntu and Gentoo should have the same number of complaints. Oh no, they don't.
Debian has two and a quarter times the user base, so it should have two and a quarter times the number of complaints. Oh no, it's more than that.
Kbuntu should have a quarter...
Looks like Gentoo isn't much worse than average after all.
But you are prepared to say ...the probability of problems with Gentoo is much higher than with other distros...
None of which detracts from portage, which has the benefit that they don't freeze things so you can upgrade when you want.
You really haven't addressed the issue here, which was that you have stated:-
In fact, if you take the problem you had unmasking fam to upgrade KDE, and do a quick Google, you get these unscientific results:-
Number of results for "kde upgrade problem" in the following distributions...
Read into the results what you will, but the number of issues with Gentoo doesn't seem to be any worse than the others, certainly not much higher.
Good luck with your current OS.
Don't take things so personally. If you are doing something wrong it doesn't mean there is something wrong with you. Nobody is infallible.
"You sometimes see Gentoo users talk about how their system helps them easily keep all their packages up to date. Of course, the downside to this is that with the Gentoo system, you have a QA department of one. You are really the first and last person in the package testing system. I know that even with Debian sid, sometimes packages get held back for a bit so they can be better tested before releasing them to a ton of users. Even with that, sometimes Debian sid packages have problems that the package maintainer didn't see (or simply made a mistake). On Gentoo, you are either stuck with potentially untested programs running on your system (or possibly beta/CVS programs), or not upgrading."...
Nice to post from someones personal vendetta against Gentoo, or more particularly Gentoo users. From 2003.
I'm sure you spotted the error with this, but in case you didn't:- It ignores the fact that packages are masked, which means the package is, in effect, in beta. It is your choice whether to use it or not. Some people see this as a benefit. You will also note there is a lot of talk here about problems with Mandrake, rather diluting your assertion that ...the probability of problems with Gentoo is much higher than with other distros.... Since this was 2003 though I'm sure Mandrake has improved.
I suppose things like KDE and the kernel qualify as "little-used software" by this definition, but it's sufficient to establish that people other than me have a problem with the QA...
I wouldn't have thought so as:-
Are you suggesting I implied they didn't???
Every distribution has "breakages your not responsible for", and Gentoo is no different in that respect. However, you stated that:-
The links you posted do not imply that this is a common experience. Indeed, if any distribution had this as a common experience for it's users it would be a lot easier to find links lambasting it.
I understand you don't like Gentoo, and you had problems with it, but I like it and, along with many other users, don't have problems with it. I can't comment on your particular case, obviously, any more than you can on mine. But the question is still there. Why did you have so many problems that your installation was unusable, yet mine has gone through kernel upgrades, portage upgrades, a gcc upgrade, changing from the monolith
I know you did, I said so in my reply to you. If you hadn't I wouldn't have been able to say it was strange.
Yes it is, thats my point. Look around in discussions where Gentoo pops up as a subject. There are many reasons why people dislike Gentoo, but Gentoo being unreliable or flakey is not one of them. If this was as common as you are trying to make out it would have been easy to link to a source, which I notice you didn't.
This isn't in dispute, only your assertion that "the probability of problems with Gentoo is much higher than with other distros" is.
Actually, it is true. But that doesn't mean there are no "reasonably easy update mechanisms" in other distributions.
Judging from the response of other people and going by my own Gentoo installation this is unusual. Not that there have never been problems, but one of the reasons people like Gentoo is that once it has been set up it is a lot less hassle to keep up to date than other distributions, and has fewer annoyances.
I really can't see how you came to this conclusion, It's certainly not something I've heard or read anywhere else, and I'm sure you're not going to base this on one installation, so could you link to your sources? I've always had the impression that portage was considered one of the best package management systems out there.
Ever thought it may be you, not Gentoo?
Please post a link to one, just one, case where someone in the UK has been prosecuted for using a VHS or DVD recorder to time shift a TV program.
You can. Use your VHS recorder as previously stated.