4 ms·

That's a really post-hoc rationalization for breaking Ubuntu.

• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• steveklabnik 1y ago
  I'm replying to the general case of why. Obviously breakage is unfortunate. But it's not like there's no benefit.
  • ok123456 1y ago
    Unfortunately, this will leave a stink that will take a lot of bathing and deodorant to mask.
  • selfmodruntime 1y ago
    Thanks steve. Sometimes there is no satisfying people.
• selfmodruntime 1y ago
  Finding critical bugs is always worth it. This didn't "break" Ubuntu, it was just a hiccup.
  • ok123456 1y ago
    The critical bugs were introduced by replacing working software. And this is just the beginning of finding all the bugs introduced. It wasn't "worth it" at all.
    • selfmodruntime 1y ago
      I recommend that you look into the bug trackers of the original tools. There were a lot of bug reports that came from reimplementing these tools. It's also not a replacement - at all. You and distro managers can choose not to use them.