On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 17:48 -0600, Ken Johanson wrote: > *perhaps* you missed the point - I have never said its not available - > its is for probably every distro and version, ever!!!!! What I did say, > sigh, is that its not included in the install discs. The implications of > this can be read in prior posts. > Bzzzt... thank you for playing. You have said several times that it is *not available* (with emphasis, and I'm sure that both you and I can find the textual exact quotes where you said it). It took several posts to understand that it *is* available and that you actually knew that, but that you were unhappy because it had been moved to another disk. Please be consistent and clear in your arguments if you expect to get anywhere. I also suggest that your problems would go away if you were to spend this much time simply arguing on fedora-devel and fedora-test that the kernel SRPM should be duplicated (placed once on the binary disks and once on the source disks) for ease of installation. This *might* imply removing some packages that you feel are obscure and irrelevant... and you can suggest that too. But this rant/flame is not convincing anyone of your point of view, mostly because you present and argue it very poorly. There seem to be better ways for you to invest your time and effort to get the results you would like. Cheers, -- Rodolfo J. Paiz <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
