Re: package splitting and kernel-image
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 09:13:47PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 06:13:48PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > So, how are you still unaware of the reasons behind the split?
>
> I'm not unaware of them. My opinion of the split isn't relevant
> to the point which I'm trying to make (and that you seem unable
> to grasp).
>
> Summary: you were unnecessarily rude in your bug reports regarding
I acknowledge that I was rude in ash, and apologised to Herbert for that,
the matter is now dead.
You have been unable (see below) to point me to the rudeness in the
kernel-image post, I honestly couldn't find any, before I was simply told to
"Go away."
> the kernel-image-* and ash packages. You could have actually achieved
> something if you had posted a short, succinct set of reasons for
> making the changes you want. Instead you posted patches and
> various irrelevancies.
A patch to implement exactly what I suggested isn't in the least irrelevant.
Actually, you'd be hard-pressed to get something *more* relevant.
> > ash was badly worded, and I've apologised for that. Point me to the parts of
> > 96854 that are insulting, and are worthy of an insulting 2-word response.
> > And no, it's not a waste of time. I prefer my mirrors working.
>
> That too mirrors are currently out of date in Australia has nothing
> to do with either the rest of the world, nor Herbert Xu.
The point I'm making is that no mirrors here, nor anywhere, need the extra
stress of duplicated packages like this, and we really shouldn't be
stressing them.
I think everyone else (including us two, I speak for myself) is getting
rather sick of this, and other flames, on the list, even if I just go by the
sheer amount of abuse/etc (even if it is good-natured) that I get on IRC
about it; if you wish to continue this further, private email is the best
place to go about it.
--
Daniel Stone
daniel@kabuki.openfridge.net
Reply to: