On Saturday 07 April 2007 16:51:32 Jan Tiggy wrote: > Anders Johansson schrieb: > > No it didn't. YaST was based on libzypp in 10.1 too > > Sure it used libzypp too, but not only. And Yes I got here still 10.1 > running and that w/o libzypp installed. The Yast's packet management > works!! > > > Also, your argument is a little strange. It's a little like "I > > uninstalled X and now startx won't run anymore. What crap" > > With all due respect, it's nonsense.
The argument, yes. The simile, no > > > Yes, YaST uses libzypp as package management backend now. Do you have > > problems with libzypp? Do you notice things that don't work? So far I > > haven't seen many bugreports about libzypp not working. > > Yes I have problems with libzyyp. I don't like things forced on me w/o > giving me any alternatives!! Excuse me, but which alternatives did you have before? It was YaST or nothing, wasn't it? So why is it suddenly such a philosophical problem for you? Which alternatives so you have in Debian? Red Hat? Mandrake? Each distribution will settle on one thing and focus on that. For alternatives you have to go to third party developers, and this is true for ALL distributions > > > And please don't try to make silly jokes about this, because rug/zmd > > don't use libzypp for their updates. > > ...anymore! However it did use libzypp in 10.1. No, it most certainly did not. > Nevertheless, I respect your poit of view, but please respect mine too. > I don't want libzypp and it is my right not to. Absolutely. Just don't pretend it's based on a rational argument -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
