On Thursday, 04 August 2005, at 16:24:51 (-0400), seth vidal wrote: > rpm -qa is prone to breaking if only b/c of the multiarch packages. > > can you tell the difference b/t the kernels that way? You apparently missed the "grep ^perl-" part. We're not dealing with kernels here. If we were, additional measures would be taken, such as a --qf option. Problem solved. > > Your bigotry is showing here, Seth. C is anything but unfun. (You > > see, some people actually like a challenge.) And Python is not easy > > for everyone to write in. > > okay... and? So stop assuming everyone is exactly like you with the same skills, wants, and needs. > I'm not concerned with bigotry - I'm concerned with having to > maintain the code in the project I run. What if the contributor is willing to maintain it? > your antagonistic tone in this email is not appreciated. Please try > to relax. The antagonistic tone started with you and your refusal to even consider what was being proposed. Perhaps if you approached the situation with a more open mind, there wouldn't be so much antagonism. On Thursday, 04 August 2005, at 16:28:20 (-0400), seth vidal wrote: > by all means, enjoy yourself. But good luck with maintaining the > rpm-perl bindings. I've already been offered that job. There is definitely a need in the community for good, solid, reliable perl bindings for RPM. But for now, the wicked, bad, naughty, evil, horrific, vile, anathematic "screen grabbers" I wrote are doing the job just fine and have been for 5+ years now. Michael -- Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <mej@xxxxxxxxx> n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/ Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "Without the hope that things will get better, that our inheritors will know a world that is fuller and richer than our own, life is pointless, and evolution is vastly overrated." -- Mira Furlan (Ambassador Delenn), Babylon Five
