On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 01:19, Dave Cotton wrote: > Tried urpmi --auto-select this morning and got:- > > kdebase-3.1.3-4mdk.i586 (due to missing mdkkdm-9.1-28mdk.i586) > kdebase-nsplugins-3.1.3-4mdk.i586 (due to missing mdkkdm-9.1-28mdk.i586) > libkdebase4-nsplugins-3.1.3-4mdk.i586 (due to missing > mdkkdm-9.1-28mdk.i586) > > IMHO this is totally out of order. mdkkdm is an _alternative_ to kdm and > some of us do not want to use it, as is our choice. Are users to get > into the habit of --allow-nodeps and the lists become full of MDK sucks > messages?
I agree %150. This mdkkdm thing has gone on for too long; to continue to advance this because a marketing department thinks it sets the distro apart from everybody else is totally bogus. Mdkkdm is just something that I don't want to bother with; bugs, glitches, and everything else that goes along with a brand new program. What the heck was the problem with either gdm or kdm? Mdkkdm is like tits on a boar hog and should indeed be a choice instead of a forced issue. The market itself can then decide wether mdkkdm will be a success or failure; for my own part, that's one cow pasture I don't want to walk thru. LX -- ������������������������������������������������ Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk Linux Mandrake 9.1 Enlightenment-0.16.5-12mdk Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/ ������������������������������������������������
