Re: [kernel.org users] [RFD] On deprecating "git-foo" for builtins

> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:50:25 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> Ouch. (I guess I shouldn't have asked.)
> 
> Does netpbm do anything convert (ImageMagick) doesn't? I'd be happy to
> get rid of netpbm.
>