On Thu, May 18, 2000 at 11:19:31AM +0200, Andreas Rabus wrote: > > The "monkeys" ar not very polite, but ... :) considering the quality of most .rpms i found in places like /contrib i don't think that is at all unfair. ;-) `monkeys' is about as polically correct as your going to get from me, considering the alternative descriptors i typically use i think monkeys is being nice :P > My experience is not that bad, but some of the rpm i installed were a real > mess, too. > But i liked to see some companies to release there software in various > flavours of package formats. well if you mean commercial companies they have plenty of money to pay someone to learn how to package things correctly. C is not very easy to use either and they pay people to do that [relativly] right (depending on the vendor) however i find it annoying that any company would release software in only one package format, many people (including me) like slackware which does not use any package manager (actually rather refreshing at times) the good old tarball should always be an option. debs are hard to make, i find that a FEATURE not a bug, if easier to make debs simply means more monkeys making debs ill take make && su 'make install' thank you very much ;-) > ar > > PS: you never learn NT. If you learnd on Version, you must use the next, > which is different... hehe yes that is true, but what is also true is this (as a friend of mine puts it): "microsoft likes to keep their users in the dark, and their administrators not too much brighter." -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
Attachment:
pgpGi3Z5bLeMr.pgp
Description: PGP signature