Re: catastrophe - but how? Aptitude goes mad

[Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>]

On Fri 01 Jul 2016 at 18:12:51 +0000, Curt wrote:

> On 2016-07-01, Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> >> 
> >> That's not what I meant. I meant ask *him* *here* in this public thread why ...
> >> etc.
> >
> > He is a subscriber to -user. By definition he *has been* asked here in
> > this public thread.
>   
> Well, there you go then, man. Maybe he's formulating a thorough reply at
> this very moment.  Of course, rather than asking him directly in the
> relevant article in which he wrote the suggestion that inspires your
> undying curiosity, you chose a more tortuous route that might permit him
> to ignore you under the pretext he hasn't read every single post in the
> thread without exception and missed the one in question.

You seem to think that -user is for one-to-one interaction. You
also seem to have an insight into the motives of posters who don't
reply to the list. This is a remarkable skill. Do you write fairy
stories too?

> Or perhaps he simply thinks your interrogation doesn't merit a response
> for whatever reason!

Could be. Who knows? What we do know is that, up to now, he has
nothing to say; that's perfectly reasonable and nobody should have
any problem with that. You have responded but have withheld clue
on the essential substance of the query; that is not reasonable.

> > I hope the above is clear. Whether he chooses to reply is up to him. You
> > obviously have no reply of any consequence to give.
> 
> Oh, geez, you're gonna hurt my feelings now, B.

All of apt's configuration options are in /etc/apt. Why search for
anything outside that location? That was my query. In line with
your 'one-to-one' concept of -user I am directing it directly at
you.

Just in case you (Curt) are in any doubt: why is searching /etc
for an apt specific directive better than searching /etc/apt?

Please feel free not to reply with anything relevant to the actual
question. Indeed, you are not obliged to reply at all.