FLAME____ Why is the kernel source not included
fedora at kensystem.com
Sat Oct 16 00:44:11 UTC 2004
Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
> 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.
My conversation has always been under the context, sometimes implied by
prior posts, of it not being included on the install disks. Believe it
or deny it - your mind is already made up.
More information about the users