On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, Bryan Paxton wrote: > This isn't faulty logic, it's fact because I have done it and it still compiled > for i586. This is due to poor maintaining of spec files hopefully. It *is* faulty because I suppose "good" spec files. (My cross-specs work.) Conclusion: One should make "good" spec files. But I remember that you also said this. I realize: We agree. (Nevertheless it is not a rpm pb.) > yes I do believe what your saying, I suppose you think remote linuxconf is safe > as well huh ? You may guess which services I will immediately uncomment in /etc/services after a new installation. :-) > Ahhh man, you got me all pegged out huh ? > I won't even comment on most of this. I will comment on your 'rpm -qp xyz.rpm > --requires'. Why on earth would I want to do this ? Why, it's friggin silly > when a code change in RPM and/or spec files can blatantly tell me what the > package needs and/or breaks. Sorry, your argument is of poor taste. No, just a different point of view. My position is IMHO the same as Jose's: One need more hassle. And I also say: If a newbie rellay wants to juggle with rpms, he should use a GUI frontend. (As GUI generally stands for "user-friendlyness".) You say: No, I want it at the console. I say: *I* don't need it, maybe I won't use it, but I won't reject it that someone will program it. Conclusion: I'm happy with rpm, there are some users out there who wants a console tool for safe and automatic updating/resolving dependencies. > Stick to the facts ? These are the facts, these are every day people using rpm. > Or do the people who the software not count ? heh I guess what you mean (sometimes my english knowledge leaves me). I say: People who have these problems you describe should maybe first RTFM. Linux is Un*x. Dot. If they want no hassles, then they should use GUI frontends. Conclusion: See one paragraph above. > > > > You're implying that DEB is unaffected by upgrade downtime... not so. > > > > > > > Sorry, I've never had to or seen a box taken off line during a dist upgrade. > > Faulty logic: Have you ever seen a box during a dist upgrade? ;-) > Yeah, PII-300, I was able to still play around in X and fire up netscape. 1:0 for me, because you have actually answered my question. > > As Jose wrote: You had luck! > I don't believe it was luck at all. Let me believe for you. > I could have done the job hand by hand(e.g.: downloading every single RPM and > installing them one at a time). But why the hell would I wanna do that ? Ah! As far as I remember you didn't mention this point before (ftp). > _us_ ? You're the only idget who has tried to flame, with no valid > counter-points. Now only did you turn a logical topic into a flame war, but you > have also made my ignore list :) Really? I got the cup? Yeah! Ok, I promise: In future I will switch from invisible to visible smilies. But your statements weren't as clear as you want it to be. ;-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The Apple III is designed to have a 10-year lifespan." Mike Markkula, Wall Street Journal 1981-04-15 Sending unsolicited commercial email to this address may be a violation of the Washington State Consumer Protection Act, chapter 19.86 RCW. Das Verschicken unverlangter kommerzieller email an diese Adresse ist verboten (LG Traunstein, 2 HK O 3755/97 vom 14.10.1997, CR 1998, 171f). (Frank Meurer, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, PGP ID: 0x5E756DA8)
