On 10/16/06, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 10:20:11PM -0700, Christopher Stone wrote: > On 10/15/06, seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >On Sun, 2006-10-15 at 22:00 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote: > >Axel is not trying to break people's systems and there was too much > >invective in your post. > > I did not mean to imply he is *trying* to break people's systems. I > am only stating what I know through experience, and this is that > people who have used ATrpms (including myself) have had problems with > yum. It is pretty much the standard answer in #fedora to tell someone > to remove ATrpms when diagnosing a problem, and it is a shame that > this is the case. Yes, it's a shame, so why are you doing it? If there were issues try to nail them down and report them instead of continuously fudding people.
First, it is not *just* me. It is basically everybody in the channel that tries to help other people. There is only one issue, and that is ATrpms overrides core packages. I am reporting this to you NOW. What are you going to do to fix this? Do you really expect the Fedora community to support both the Fedora distribution as well as the ATrpms distribution?
> So let me rephrase my statement and say that using ATrpms has the > "potential" to break your system. A sudden change of facts. ...
Hey, I am just trying to be more tactful. You are reacting so negatively to everything I say that I am retracting some of the things I said previously and trying to state them in a more tactful way. -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
