Re: Keymap problems in D-I (was: Re: Bugs in the latest Debian Sid installer)
Am Montag 24 August 2009 16:11:10 schrieb Wouter Verhelst:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 02:33:31PM +0200, Uwe Bugla wrote:
> > If I do describe accurately a problem dealing with netinst image, and,
> > as a consequence, I am asked to perform a test with a netboot image
> > (which has technologically nothing to do with the netinst one
> This is so utterly and completely wrong it's not even funny.
> 99% of what's on the installer images is the same from one flavour to
> the other. The only difference between flavours are the default
> retrievers that are put on the image, the drivers that are available,
> and what part of the base system is available. It *does* technologically
> have a *lot* to do with the netinst one.
Non-qualified superficial nonsense of a "would-like-to"-ranter!
> It was a perfectly reasonable debugging attempt by Christian to see
> whether he could reproduce it by using the image that was easiest for
> him to try.
Nonsense! See first point in how far!
> He didn't ask you to perform a test with a netboot image specifically,
Lie! He in fact did!
> but rather asked you to perform a test with a daily build, to see
> whether the problem still existed in the latest version.
Crap! If noone did any kind of intervention on the images in the time window
of some days, everything that changes is the date, but not the contents!
Miguels posting was the best prove that ever could have happened to me,
showing that some things within the Debian installer developers do not work in
practice as expected!
> Since these are
> easiest to test with netboot images, it's not unreasonable for him to
> point you to the netboot image -- though you may want to use something
> else, and report on that.
Your mental incapability easily shows that you even do not know the difference
between a netboot and a netinst image (although I have explained it now for
more than once, damn stupid!):
I would call that the highest possible state of cretinism (using medical
terminology). Go to find a doctor please!
> The fact that you *think* you know what you're talking about does not,
> in any way, imply that you do; and it *certainly* does not give you the
> right to be rude, to start calling people names, and to tell them that
> they are incompetent.
Leave that point up to me and please go to find a doctor, OK!
> If you still believe you do, then kindly fuck off.
Non-qualified stupid rant from the first word to the last - it's your expected
task to fuck off from here - not me!