On Mon, 2004-10-25 at 14:46 -0400, Ricardo Veguilla wrote: > I can't believe you are making this argument.*You* "forced" yourself > when *you* decided to use an unsupported beta. For the love of Pete, people, chill a little. You're arguing against something that Matías NEVER SAID, damn it. All the guy said is that he's happy to use a test version, fully understands his risks and has taken appropriate precautions, BUT feels that not signing the Rawhide RPM packages exposes him to the small, but greater than zero, risk of someone tampering with a package hosted on a mirror somewhere. He seems to feel that this is a small but unnecessary risk that could easily be avoided by simple additional security measures which would improve the status quo and which have not been taken. All he wants to know is that he's putting potentially buggy, late-night- coffee-build, eat-your-data-alive packages on his computer BUT that if he loses data it will be to a devel problem and not some cracker. Beating the hell out of him for using test versions isn't doing *ANYONE* any good... reread his post on what he does to keep his data safe, how he runs his systems, and how long he's been running beta OS releases, and he *clearly* is doing this will full knowledge and acceptance of the risks involved. Read the posts carefully. Argue intelligently and coherently. Or be quiet. Not just Ricardo, either... there were a couple other "you're not fit to run Rawhide" posts which were no more intelligent. Sheesh. -- Rodolfo J. Paiz <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part