On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 08:26 -0600, Ken Johanson wrote: > Wrong-oh. The responses here have shown protectionist, possibly juts > zealtotous reponses merely for *defending* a distro that doesn't provide > the source to the kernel that it has running. This is akin to moving to > a country where you're told you'll have rights by their constituion - > but gess what -- you cant have the constitution. The constitution, like > the kernel source, is the heart -- the foundation of everything. > Foundation. Linus himself has tore into redhat for this very krop. > > So from the responses I've seen, its quite clear that they've never > compiled or customized one -- one young zealot even claimed I should "go > back to windows", which is *exactly* the level he's on, having no idea > why the kernel source is providied in the first place. Clearly a genric > kernel and modules fits him just dandy, just like windows. > > Again, no kernel source, no constitution - and that means something to > hide, just as the kernels authors have asserted. > > Again, zealots need not apply. Ken, I'm sorry but you're being an idiot. 1) The kernel source is not needed by the vast majority of the users. That's a perfectly valid reason in and of itself not to include it. 2) It's source, hence there is perfectly valid logic in the argument that it should be available as a .src.rpm. 3) The kernel source *is* readily available by taking one small extra step - installing the .src.rpm. Your analogy to the Constitution is just plain silly. Guess what? Here in the US you are guaranteed Constitutional protection but you are not promised a copy of the Constitution. You have to go download it, check it out at the library, or buy a copy of it. Similarly, there is nothing at all preventing you from obtaining the kernel source with no more effort than it takes to obtain a copy of the Constitution. You're just bitching to bitch. You have to take one silly extra step to get the kernel source and you're overreacting to the perceived inconvenience. Get over it. Cheers! -- A: Because people read from top to bottom Q: Why is top posting bad? Thomas Cameron, RHCE, CNE, MCSE, MCT
