On Sat, 2004-07-17 at 17:02, Kevin Brown wrote:
> > Excuse my ignorance but am I correct in assuming that means that Red-Hat's
> > apt-get is differant from Debian's apt-get? If that is so Red Hat is trying
> > to pull the wool over our eyes and make us fools by making people think that
> > Debian's and their apt-get are the same (that's what I thought!). If DEbian
> > was a company RedHat would have a messy lawsuit on their hands. Red Hat
> > should have called it something else. 'dep-get' maybe. 'program-get' perhaps.
> > 'wearedeceitfulscumbags-didwefoolyou' would work too! Or maybe
> > 'debianisbetterthanussoweare-posers'. :-)Mike(-:
>
> Lets see... apt-get is not a closed, proprietary application, as such any distro
> can use it even if they don't use other things like the debian repositories...
>
> I don't understand your continued attacks against redhat and their distro...
> Besides, RH wasn't the first to add apt-get to their own distro... Others
> ported the system over to have an apt-like interface for rpms (hence apps like
> apt4rpm...).
Mike, you should take a moment and think before you post.
There are a few people on this list that will stand up and defend your
poorly chosen comments. However, if you keep trying to pick fights, you
will lose these supporters.
If I am to understand your previous posts correctly, you use a debian
based distro. What do you hope to gain from your anti-redhat comments?
You've already made your choice so why continue with this slanderous
campaign?
Bart
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)