On Friday 23 July 2004 04:55 am, Paul Johnson wrote: > [1] RPM considered catastrophically harmful. Until RPM actually > *standardizes* with standard package names, standard filesystem, real > dependency resolution, and permanent removal of file dependencies, rpm > will always be the proof-of-concept and dpkg the proper implimentation > of automated package management. Though this assumes that RPM-based > distros actually meet the same high standard of quality assurance > usually found in Mexican tap water. It's 2004: Using RPM should not > make users start clenching their colons and dread ever touching a > computer. If people want to know why so many people say, "I tried > Linux, but it sucked, so I put Windows back on," they should look no > farther than RPM.
You made beer spew out my nose. I haven't laughed this hard in ages. -- Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621 http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
