Re: Good bye
- From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 00:37:28 -0600
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
OK, I'll take your "do not support" and move on to "intentionally break"You say limit by design, I say do not support. Limit by design wouldMy point has nothing to do with promoting anything or whether theBut that has nothing to do with my point about enabling the user toEveryone here knows the deal with Fedora. They don't promote non OSS
install additional software which is why I have an operating system in
the first place.
software for partly legal and (in my opinion, might be wrong) partly
philosophical reasons against closed source.
additional software meets your religious beliefs or not. It is strictly
about providing a user with a platform that is not limited by design or
its inability to provide stable interfaces.
be to hard code repos into yum. Not support would be to not provide
all repos in yum by default.
in every case where something that worked in one version does not work
in the next or after an update. From the perspective of a person who
just wants to run some programs it's all the same when they don't work.
Got any examples of that?
Since this is Karl's thread, his problems with Nvidia and sound should be famous by now and apply to any kernel modules. But every fedora version has required new patches to VMware that you have to track down, firewire has had about 50/50 odds of working, anything that knew device names would break from one version to the next, CIPE hasn't worked since FC1... What other OS forces you to go though these contortions continuously just to continue getting security fixes for the bugs it ships?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Good bye
- From: Craig White
- Re: Good bye
- From: Ian Malone
- Re: Good bye
- From: Arthur Pemberton
- Re: Good bye
- References:
- Good bye
- From: Karl Larsen
- Re: Good bye
- From: Les Mikesell
- Re: Good bye
- From: Craig White
- Re: Good bye
- From: Les Mikesell
- Re: Good bye
- From: John Summerfield
- Re: Good bye
- From: Les Mikesell
- Re: Good bye
- From: Chris Jones
- Re: Good bye
- From: Les Mikesell
- Re: Good bye
- From: Arthur Pemberton
- Re: Good bye
- From: Les Mikesell
- Re: Good bye
- From: Arthur Pemberton
- Good bye
- Prev by Date: Re: Good bye
- Next by Date: Re: Good bye
- Previous by thread: Re: Good bye
- Next by thread: Re: Good bye
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|