First off this was NOT a personal attack on anyone or the community and
shame on you for turning it into a personal attack on me. Second it is
based on my opinion in what i have read in news articles. My information
could be dated and people opinions could have changed in the past six months
since i have stopped actively searching out linux articles (i do still read
/. but thats about it) since i have settled on my distro of choice. IN NO
WAY have i claimed to be an expert or have ties inside the community....I
only sit back, watch, and call them like i see them. BTW if you want to
bash me and my ego please do it OFF the list.
Todd
> On Sun, 27 May 2001, Todd wrote:
>
> > Yup in the grand scheme of things its tiny...and it will fail for one
reason
> > and one reason only......Egos.....for example: The people at red hat
have
> > already said no way that they would use apt-get
>
> IANARHE -- Cite please, ,,, I think that's a
> mischaracterization -- certainly Jeff Johnson, who is the
> prime architect for the maintenance and extension of RPM at
> Red Hat, which is the affected engine, has not said that ...
> Indeed the package relocations at RH 7.0 were largely to
> conform to the latest (still not official) FHS specs.
>
> Indeed, Jeff offered some thoughts on the rpm-list to the
> Connectiva fellows to enhancing their apt-get based RPM
> updating product (against the strict commercial interest of
> RH); and has detailed the intracies of fixing RPM databases,
> without charge, on that list, after Ximian Red Carpet has
> corrupted several ,,, hardly monopolistic behaviour.
>
> > and the people at debian say rpm is evil (paraphrasing of
> course)....
>
> Gee, I nust have missed that one too -- funny, for I read my
> Debian-QA, and Debian Weekly News most carefully. Cite,
> please.
>
> > what is gonna make the standard and
> > what will that standard be?...if there ever is a standard it will work
this
> > way: 1. Placement of libs 2. standard for "other" system files.
Thats
> > all that might ever be agreed up on and *I* feel it wont even make it
that
> > far because of some of the egos involved.
>
> I had not noticed the ego in Stuart Anderson's presentation to
> SLUG -- http://www.suncoastlug.org/anderson.html -- nor in
> Andrew Josey's work as reflected by the Open Group pitching in
> on this work, with the conformance testing harness, and
> roughly monthly public updates on distro compliance across
> the LSB-devel list.
>
> > In case you havent noticed there
> > are some HUGE egos in the linux community and those people hate it when
they
> > have to concede even little points. Its nothing wrong with the
community
> > its just a fact of life you see EVERYWHERE.
>
> Well I see at least one ego. A google search, and a deja
> search turn up this:
>
> > Your search - author:trunnels@tampabay.rr.com - did not
> > match any documents.
> > No pages were found containing "trunnels@tampabay.rr.com"
>
> Under what userid and email address do you contribute, rather
> than throw rocks?
>
> -- Russ
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:35:13 EDT