I think that writer needs some serious help - claiming that a distro that hasn't changed since the early nineties, that lacks a good method of upgrading and a native package manager, claiming that it still matters - I don't understand! Do they like hurting themselves in some way? :(
Oscar On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 20:41:58 -0200 "Newton B. Costa Junior" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/05/11/23/1744237.shtml?tid=166&tid=106 > > Funny thing is that Arch Linux is mentioned on the first post!! > And even the wiki is mentioned! > > Newton > -- > "Winners don't use drugs" > -William S. Sessions, Director, FBI > > _______________________________________________ > arch mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
pgpR6CcAmswxR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
