Re: wine issues
From: mjt-pca (not_at_here.com)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:40:16 GMT
Paul Lutus wrote:
> mjt-pca wrote:
> < snip >
>>>>>> `find / -name wine`
>>>>> Please! That is the very slowest way to find something on a Linux
>>>> On *ALL* Linux systems, hmmmmmmmmm?
>>> Your words, not mine. Read the first post. "Mandrake Linux 9.1".
>> Yes, Although the poster uses Redhat, the reader of a post to alt.linux
> Welcome to Usenet 101: Replies address the concerns primarily of the
> original posters, and secondarily of the readers, who must ask themselves
> if the post applies to their system. Readers use Google to sort out which
> of the many, many Usenet posts apply to their concerns. Learn this now, or
> learn it later, but you WILL learn it.
Yes, I DID take the user into account. That is why I put forth the method of
finding a file that will give him the best results to finding a file, ANY
FILE in the most situations. I do NOT want to give him a method that may
FAIL on his next search. One day you will understand the best way to
educate people is to teach them a basic tool that will give them the best,
most accurate results, then teach them the commands that
>> You have a problem with that? TO BAD.
> Forgot to learn how spell? Well, "TO BAD".
Ah, the last gasp of a person that has totally LOST, gripe about spelling.
Ha, guess you have NOTHING of substance to back up your gripes. Figures.
>>> all recent Linux releases have both "whereis" and "locate." AFAIK all
>>> recent releases have "whereis."
>> Virtually but not ALL!!!
> I didn't reply to "all". I replied to the OP. Learn how Usenet works, just
> after you learn how to spell.
Ahhh, again, do not address valid points only to attack spelling!!! Have any
VALID POINTS regarding _what_ I said?
> The main problem with your post was that it was completely and totally
> brainless. It represents the worst way to locate something. All the
> assumptions were yours, and they were contradicted by the information the
> OP kindly provided.
Buzz, WRONG! You were the one that suggested whereis and locate, I just
pointed out what what wrong with the method YOU posted. What I don't
uderstand is how you can say that what *I* posted "represents the worst way
to locate something" when it was YOU that suggested the methods of location
I was demonstrating!!!!! The method I provided the OP WILL indeed find
his file for him _*AND*_ it will work with EVERY OTHER SEARCH for a file he
needs to do. The methods you provided will NOT work for every other search
he tries, as I have demonstated in my examples and you IGNORE!!! Even you
say they "represents the worst way to locate something". Now, please try
and back up your claims with SOMETHING!!!
> < snip garbage >
Ignore that which you disagree with. Bash spelling rather than the points
made. If you have a VALID point to make about the SUBJECT make it WITH
SOMETHING TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM.
The compalint about "find" is it is slow.
the compalint about "whereis" and "locate" is they are inaccurate or
I will give the slow accurate and precise over fast and inaccurate to a
person that is just learning EVERY TIME.
So, go ahead and ignore the points I made and bitch about spelling, if you
can't actually ADDRESS THE ISSUES I RAISED! I expect no better from you.