Paul Rogers wrote: > As seems > indicated by the current situation, someone should adopt a QC role, and > have one system that trails, i.e. has exactly the package versions > specified in the HSR, and verifies that each version of LFS does in fact > install flawlessly with those prerequisites.
Volunteers welcomed. > I began programming in 1966, FORTRAN II, on an IBM-1620 I started in 1965. I still have my FORTRAN (not II) manual. I also used an IBM-1620. The mass storage device was punched cards. Also IBM 7090/7094, IBM 360 Series 60, and CDC 6600. >> You don't have any standing to 'expect' anything from us. You can >> suggest, but with your attitude, my reaction is to push back and >> say no, even if that's wrong. > > Petulance? You need ego strokes for "being helpful"? Such is > "professionalism", eh? People report problems and you blow them off? > Why are you involved? No, not petulance, frustration. You report a problem doing things *your* way and we *did* try to help. We ask for your help in confirming the problem in a way we can duplicate and you say no. Who is being petulant here? > So what's your argument? "We'll put whatever we please in our book, > and whether it works for you or not is none of our concern?" Why > bother? My argument is that we will fix problems that we can confirm. I still don't see why you won't help us help you. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
