On Thu, 18 May 2006 22:27:59 +0200 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > Circular argument. | | Let me repeat it in primary school language. | | A supported statement is one which has the form: | | <reason 1> <reason 2> ... <Statement> ... <reason n-1> <reason n> | | In short a supported statement has reasons that aim to argue why the | statement is true.
And your definition of a primary package manager is: <reason 1> <statement> <reason 1> | You say that there is no such a thing as a primary package manager, | but fail to state any reason (here or in other mails) as to why this | is true. Instead of arguing why my support is false you just say that | I am saying things that are not true. This is an unbased accusation. No, I am claiming that your entire idea of a primary package manager is based upon circular logic and is thus invalid. It's like trying to debate the existence of green happiness -- since the thing the words describe is meaningless, there's no logical argument to be had. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
