Fussy config file = petty criticism ? If so deal with it you will hear far worse I'm sure. Why not be honest ? and admit that all your really after is to continue the conflict we hard several months ago.
So can we drop it please? If nothing else this is counter productive. I'm very surprised your still upset from previous clash which I had let lie. To be still looking for conflict after all this time is quite sad. so there is no misunderstanding: * The Freeradius configs are the touchiest fussiest config files I have ever dealt with, this in no way reflects on the product itself. It is just a very steep learning curve. I also am aware that most of the complexity is due to it supporting many many protocols and backends. * Freeradius Documentation is lacking (its a common thing for oss projects). That is a statement, not a shot at any of the howto writers. Again I do realise that this is due to the diversity of the project (many different possible configurations). I will gladly help document my current setup once finalized. * I despise people whose only purpose in a thread to be a obnoxious self-important git. To clarify on this most recent occasion that would be you Alan, though I have seen you been very helpful on other threads. The last thing a frustrated user who has been making an honest attempt needs to hear is "your an idiot, rtfm, upgrade, etc" <- paraphrasing of course. On 7/9/07, Alan DeKok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jacob Jarick wrote: > > If you wish to split hairs over a single line in my email that you > > purposefully skewed the meaning off by all means be that guy. Should > > you have anything constructive at all to offer the conversation please > > do, however petty criticisms are not welcome though. > > So why do you engage in petty criticisms of FreeRADIUS? > > Alan DeKok. > - > List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html > - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
