Ralph, Do you normally respond in a bottom-up fashion? On 21/07/2008, Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos@xxxxxxxxxxxx<ra%2Bcentos@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > Alan Bartlett wrote: > > On 18/07/2008, Filipe Brandenburger <filbranden@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Without trying to start another heated discussion, are we going to > > > create a specific page on creating a building infrastructure for RPMs > > > and on how to rebuild a SRPM? My original e-mail from last week > > > follows. Please let me know if you want me to contribute. > > > > > > > > Have you fully researched what currently is present in the WIki? > > > http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/YumAndRPM#head-d2b0e7b7f3943ba0f8d08f9cfa46e821ba74aff4 > > > Well, hints and tips for building rpms/rebuilding srpms are all over the > wiki, Which is what I wanted to highlight by quoting that, above, as another example. but that is not what I call "well documented". I most certainly have not used the phrase "well documented". Why do you put it in quotation marks in a response to me? All that does is imply (to a casual reader or one who does not bother to review everything in this conversational thread) that you are quoting my words - which you are not. As I have said before the English language is very precise if used correctly. Problems will occur with its misuse. A centralized point > where anything else which needs explanations on doing so can link to is > something we are really missing (IMNSHO). Your last sentence above, once the intended logic is extracted from it, is something I would agree with. Perhaps you will kindly expand on what it is you intend by the "not so" (NS) in the parenthesised IMNSHO? Alan. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/attachments/20080721/596b673c/attachment-0001.htm
