Re: itp: static bins / resolving static debian issues
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 09:18:41AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 22, 1999 at 04:04:53PM -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> > This entire post is flamage, with absolutely no arguments of
> > substance, or even sense. If you want to be heard, perhaps you could
> > explain yourself better, with less profanity?
>
> "profanity", to use your quaint terminology, is sometimes necessary to
> get a point across. unfortunately, some people are too stupid to see any
> point when certain "bad" words are used.
>
> the point is that making arbitrary changes to the default setup pisses
> people off.
>
> YOU people are the ones who want something different. DON'T TRY TO
> FORCE IT ON EVERYONE ELSE.
>
> AND YES, I AM FUCKING SHOUTING BECAUSE THIS IS A POINT THAT HAS BEEN
> MADE TO YOU GUYS AND THEN PROMPTLY FORGOTTEN SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE LAST
> FEW DAYS. NOT SURPRISINGLY, THIS IS STARTING TO GET FUCKING ANNOYING!
>
> in plain and simple terms:
>
> do whatever you like with your own systems, but DO NOT FUCK WITH THE
> DEBIAN DEFAULTS.
I'm sorry, but I truly don't understand what exactly it is that you're
shouting about, and it's difficult to tell when all you're doing is
spouting incoherently and insultingly. Perhaps it is because, though
I have been "TRYING TO FORCE IT ON EVERYONE ELSE", I have never made
any statement even close to that, or that even involved changing any
configuration (in fact, my sole role in this discussion so far has been
an attempt to avoid changing defaults). Perhaps it is because neither
have I really seen anyone else say that, though I can't tell for sure
when you refuse to explain what it is you're talking about, making it
impossible to clear up any misunderstandings. Perhaps it is because
your sole argument (at least in these messages) is that anything that
involves changing the way a debian default install does anything is a
priori wrong and evil, regardless of what else it does (not that I don't
think you might have some logical and reasonable argument, but you're
certainly not making one here).
I truly do not want to get involved in another set of the personal
attacks that this thread seems to bring on, especially now that it's
been cooling down. Do you think it would possible for you to calm
down a little bit, and explain what exactly it is that we're doing
that you don't like, and why you don't like it?
-- Nathaniel
Reply to: