On 8 November 2012 13:02, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/08/2012 07:56 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> >> or do you have any other installer you can point to that behaves like >> this? >> >> Pointing out how the installer currently works does not change my opinion >> on the fact that if an installer ( any installer ) cannot run on his own >> bits isolated from the package set he is about install is a design flaw and >> is something that should be corrected ( from my pov ). >> >> > > > Your pov is flawed. Not the design which does apply to all the mainstream > Linux distribution installers and not just Anaconda. Really, you > shouldn't be even arguing about this at all. > > > If my pov is flawed then why do you not enlighten me and explain to me what > causes the dependency in the installer environment with the release and why > these have to be tied together? I have tried 3 times. It is clear that my ability to do so is incapable of reaching you. I am sorry, but I have done my best.. and now I am done. -- Stephen J Smoogen. "Don't derail a useful feature for the 99% because you're not in it." Linus Torvalds "Years ago my mother used to say to me,... Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." —James Stewart as Elwood P. Dowd -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
