From: "Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx>"
> You are indeed correct (I must have been looking at the RHEL3 dir**)
First off, that's now 2 strikes for me. Small ones considering the context
well outside of the points, but still it hurts my credibility.
This is one of the things I hate about meta-discussions, at least how I
approach them. Sometimes I just need to learn that it doesn't matter
how many additional examples I give, some people aren't going to do
anything but blame Red Hat. And by giving example after example, or
attempting explain item after item, I'm going to eventually slip up from
memory from time-to-time, which hurts my credibility -- regardless if
the actual mistake was small given the context of the discussion.
Sigh, there is a point where one should just resign and submit to the
fact that if something doesn't work for someone, and { Microsoft,
Red Hat, SuSE, even Debian as of late, etc... } is involved anywhere
at all (even if it's a fork to another architecture -- e.g., anyone
who has dealt with Cobalt/Sun releases, a primary reason for Red Hat's
latter trademark enforcement ;-), the other person has no interest in
understanding the "root" cause and will not see anyting to the contrary.
My apologies for tying up the list with this non-sense.
--
Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx
