I think it worked. Sent from my iclone.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Marco Peereboom <sl...@peereboom.us> wrote: > shoot it again son. > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 03:59:31PM -0700, Zeb Packard wrote: >> Help, i shot it three times and I'm on my fourth monitor, 3 bullets >> left. What next? >> >> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Eric Furman <ericfur...@fastmail.net> wrote: >> > Please don't. This whole thread has gotten really stupid. >> > Unless you have something funny to add, let's kill it now. >> > >> > On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 14:11 -0700, "Mehma Sarja" <mehmasa...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> On 7/11/11 10:48 PM, Andres Perera wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:43 PM, patrick keshishian<pkesh...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> you failed at making any point. >> >> > i'll rebrand it into convenient twitter format: >> >> > >> >> > debian splits packages to the point where a single service is a >> >> > associated to a single top level package, meaning that there's never a >> >> > reason for unused installed services >> >> > >> >> > openbsd limitations do not apply 1:1 to other systems unless they >> >> > happen to be openbsd. in the previous sentence, "openbsd" can be >> >> > replaced by any word >> >> > >> >> OK, I got the first paragraph but not the second. Could you please >> >> "rebrand" it so people like me can unnerstand? I just got off the boat. >> >> To be clear, which is my thing today, here is how I read the "openbsd >> >> limitations..." sentence: OpenBSD limitations apply only to OpenBSD. As >> >> my 4-year old would say, "Hello..." Your last sentence is equally >> >> baffling. I understand you may be mad at some responders, but the lack >> >> of clarity makes us haze over your argument and take the topic off on a >> >> tangent that you do not like. And that makes you mad, it is a Type A >> >> thing - we understand. >> >> >> >> Simple, clear sentences sting the most. >> >> >> >> Mehma
