"They" full well know what unsupported means. It is OFFICIALLY not
supported. Why? Is it because there is any REAL difference between the
SUPPORTED version (in OFFICIAL cooker) and the "unsupported" versions for
7.2? NO. No difference. The only real difference is the former is built
from glibc2.2 while the latter is built with glibc2.1. Big deal.
For all PRACTICAL purposes, they are identical. This is proven true by the
fact that if you download the straight source from KDE rather than from
Mandrake sources, it does not say you MUST use glibc2.2. Many other distros
that are making use of the latest KDE are NOT using glibc2.2 (yet).
Get off your snide, sarcastic platform. Complaint or criticism IS valid,
regardless. How would you EVER know of any problem if no one did this? As
for tone, when repeated and repeated questions or posts of problems
concerning what should be a VERY simple problem and answer go unanswered
repeatedly, then I would say tone has every right to change.
Get over it.
On Sunday 04 February 2001 05:41, Mark Weaver wrote:
> Chris,
>
> Maybe you should change the name of "unsupported" to "bleeding-edge". They
> might get the idea then, do ya think? :)
--
Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain.
