Re: KDE is now broken (Fwd: Heads-up: KDE4 hitting testing tonight (UTC) )
lee wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:01:08PM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> So, yes, you did say that. You just didn't use those words, which is why
>> they weren't a quote. (Notice the lack of quotation marks.) Anyone reading
>> this message can follow the exact reasoning I used to get to that
>> conclusion, based on the facts in this message--the quoted text. Please let
>> me know what, if any, problems exist in my reasoning.
>
> I'm not interested in how you're turning and twisting the words ---
> maybe it helps if you keep in mind that using language is different
> from using mathematics or a programming language. The fact remains
I agree with Boyd in his understanding of your post. What is the use of
language if you say one thing that a reasonable person would understand
but meant something completely different? If a reasonable receiver does
not understand the message as intended, the communication was faulty.
> that I don't have the mysql server installed and that kde isn't
> working anymore after the update.
What follows from Boyd's post is that mysql is not necessary for a
working system and he disagrees with you that removal of mysql breaks
KE. Proof: I have the new KDE working fine in Debian Testing even after
having removed mysql server. So the fact is that mysql is not necessary
for a working KDE unless you are using package which require it.
Perhaps you should see what exactly is broken. I tried to help in this
thread by posting the log of packages that I removed while removing
mysql. From your sole response to that post, I gather your kdm is not
working. Try gdm instead, I use it without any problem. Other than that,
you didn't report any issues to the resolution I posted so I thought you
had it all working again.
--
Please reply to this list only. I read this list on its corresponding
newsgroup on gmane.org. Replies sent to my email address are just
filtered to a folder in my mailbox and get periodically deleted without
ever having been read.
Reply to: