Re: WTF is it with ubuntu? - Slackware

This is a discussion on Re: WTF is it with ubuntu? - Slackware ; * notbob wrote in alt.os.linux.slackware: > On 2008-10-21, SINNER wrote: > >> The only thing I said to you was to pay attention. > > Oh, so you don't consider an admonishment a putdown. I got a mother. Oiy! You ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 129

Thread: Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?

  1. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?

    * notbob wrote in alt.os.linux.slackware:

    > On 2008-10-21, SINNER wrote:
    >
    >> The only thing I said to you was to pay attention.

    >
    > Oh, so you don't consider an admonishment a putdown. I got a mother.


    Oiy! You give that same line to your school teachers? No, I dont consider
    it a putdown, if you do, here is an apology.

    >> Youve been told multiple
    >> times WHY you SHOULD upgrade slrn......

    >
    > "SHOULD"!? Isn't that rather presumptuous?


    If I said it has been SUGGESTED multiple times why you SHOULD would that
    have been better (rather than told)? Seems its the same to me. SHOULD is
    not MUST, no it is not presumptious at all, not to mention, there is a
    good reason why you SHOULD and that reason showed up right here in this
    thread. Now, if you dont mind looking at jibberish if some utf posts are
    made, thats your perogitive. If I said you SHOULD eat right and SHOULD
    take your vitamins, would that too be presumtuous?

    As this is a text based medium I like it to be as visually appealing as
    possible without the use of pretty pictures or HTML, on this, I am sure
    we both agree and slrn does this impecably.

    I have seen posts in the old version that are just horrendous if someone
    sticks an accent or an umelot or some other odd character in the post
    which makes it difficult to read, sometimes just a " or other character
    causes the post to be almost unreadable depending on the character set
    being posted with. I have been using slrn for years and was waiting with
    baited breath for this update, Usenet is much cleaner now, now if we
    could just send someone to Alan Connors house to steal his computer, it
    would be awesome.

    Again, as this is text and the purpose is to diseminate information, it
    would help if said information is legible, in many cases, posts contained
    characters not displayed correctly, that is now fixed.

    >
    >> no one was talking to you.......

    >
    > Oh, I should be invited? Never stopped you.


    The point was, you made it a point to jump in and comment on something
    that we (you and I and several others) previously discussed just to throw
    your 2 cents in again telling us all how it is unnecssary and very
    microsoft like to do, yet I bet when you get an update notification that
    your kernel needs to be updated or some other security patch is available
    you download and install it. Seems a bit hypocritical if you ask me.

    >
    >> damn you are thick!

    >
    > yeah, that's not personal.


    Personal, yes, berating, bad mouthing, no.

    >
    > You wanna discuss linux n' tech, I'm here. Wanna fling barbs, not
    > interested.


    Above.

    --
    David

  2. Re: Slackware and KDE (was: Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?)

    On 2008-10-21, Sidney Lambe wrote:

    > A clarifying note: Slackware does not just "come" with kde on it. It
    > is a part of its default install and is heavily pushed by all the
    > main people at Slackware.


    What's your point? By default, slackware boots to CLI, from which you can
    change to any one of a half dozen other desktops. The default for startx
    has to be something. It's kde. What do you think it should be? Fine.
    Change it.


    nb

  3. Re: Slackware and KDE


    Sidney Lambe wrote:
    > Peter Chant wrote:
    >> Sidney Lambe wrote:
    >>
    >>


    Ah Sidney, I should have been paying more attention to the headers. I
    don't usually as usually there is no need. You've been cross-posting to
    comp.os.linux.misc and alt.os.linux.slackware but setting follow-ups
    only to colmisc. I wondered why I was not seeing my posts in aols.
    Interesting that I don't see your reply to my last in aols. One could
    summise that if you know I don't post in colm I won't see your response
    and everyone would have assumed that I did not have a response - you had
    "won". However, that is a guess, and could be incorrect.

    A bit rude at best. I'm at a bit at a loss over how it could be accidental.

    >> What about the other points I raised? You did not respond to them.
    >> Specifically, if you don't install KDE on Slackware what is the problem?
    >> How specifically has the non-KDE parts of Slackware suffered due to the
    >> inclusion of KDE?

    >
    > Once again, you are trying to change the subject.


    Well, you've attempted to side step around it completely.

    To quote my earlier post:

    pjc>OK, so is your issue that YOU don't want to run KDE or that
    pjc>you don't want OTHERS to run KDE? I suspect the latter. If it is
    pjc>the first don't install it, no one is forcing you, if its the second
    pjc>it is really none of your business what other people want to run.

    You completely failed to respond to this. From what I can see you do
    not want anyone to run KDE. Is that true? Yes or no. Better than
    that, yes, no or some explaining who the "some" are.

    A realted question, perhaps you don't mind KDE, provided people have to
    install it as a separate package? Will you answer this one?

    I can't think of any reasonable reason why not. I can't see how these
    questions are changing the subject.

  4. Re: Slackware and KDE (was: Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?)

    notbob wrote:

    > On 2008-10-21, Sidney Lambe wrote:
    >
    >> A clarifying note: Slackware does not just "come" with kde on it. It
    >> is a part of its default install and is heavily pushed by all the
    >> main people at Slackware.

    >
    > What's your point? By default, slackware boots to CLI, from which you can
    > change to any one of a half dozen other desktops. The default for startx
    > has to be something. It's kde. What do you think it should be? Fine.
    > Change it.


    Thinking about it, yes, it is the default in a list. All other options are
    there, plain to see.

    Pete
    --
    http://www.petezilla.co.uk

  5. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?

    Peter Chant wrote:
    > Sidney Lambe wrote:
    >> Peter Chant wrote:
    >>> John Hasler wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>> Can't really see what is all that terrible...
    >>>> Who decides who's an expert?
    >>> Well, true, you have a point. But then if they are chosen on anything
    >>> other than merit it is not a technocracy.

    >>
    >> Who decides who or what is meritorious?
    >>
    >> Technocracy:
    >>
    >> A government or social system controlled by technicians,
    >> especially scientists and technical experts.
    >>
    >> http://www.thefreedictionary.com/technocracy
    >>
    >> It doesn't say what kind of scientists, or if they are
    >> honest or competent.
    >>
    >> There's nothing about "merit" there.
    >>
    >> (what a farcical discussion this has become)

    >
    > Well, for society perhaps not so good. But for a desktop environment
    > that you are not compelled to use it seems like a good idea.
    >
    > Pete


    There you go, misleading people again. No, there isn't anyone
    with a bullwhip forcing anyone to use kde at slackware. But for
    those of us who aren't idiots, the world is not that simple.
    No one forces anyone to use a car, either, they just create a
    society where it's a complete drag, if not impossible, to live
    without one.

    Slackware does not just "come" with kde on it. It is a part of
    its default install and is heavily pushed by all the main people
    at Slackware.

    kde site:slackware.com

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...kware.com&btnG

    217 hits

    On ONE effing website that offers a computer operating system with
    over a thousand applications on it, not counting kde.

    Any newbie installing Slackware is going to find himself with kde in
    front of him after a succesful installation, not a command prompt in
    an xterm or console.

    And everyone at Slackware will be pushing him/her to learn kde
    instead of bash and the Linux operating system.

    There is no one at Slackware who even suggests to any newbie that
    they don't have to run kde. That there are other options.


    Sid

    --
    contact: http://tinyurl.com/5jxzoj
    googlegroups users see:
    http://tinyurl.com/5mbs7c

  6. Re: Slackware and KDE

    Peter Chant writes:
    > A bit rude at best. I'm at a bit at a loss over how it could be
    > accidental.


    Look up the posting history of "Allan Connor" on the Linux newsgroups. And
    please stop feeding the troll.
    --
    John Hasler
    john@dhh.gt.org
    Dancing Horse Hill
    Elmwood, WI USA

  7. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?


    Sidney Lambe writes:

    > Peter Chant wrote:
    >> Sidney Lambe wrote:
    >>> Peter Chant wrote:
    >>>> John Hasler wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Can't really see what is all that terrible...
    >>>>> Who decides who's an expert?
    >>>> Well, true, you have a point. But then if they are chosen on anything
    >>>> other than merit it is not a technocracy.
    >>>
    >>> Who decides who or what is meritorious?
    >>>
    >>> Technocracy:
    >>>
    >>> A government or social system controlled by technicians,
    >>> especially scientists and technical experts.
    >>>
    >>> http://www.thefreedictionary.com/technocracy
    >>>
    >>> It doesn't say what kind of scientists, or if they are
    >>> honest or competent.
    >>>
    >>> There's nothing about "merit" there.
    >>>
    >>> (what a farcical discussion this has become)

    >>
    >> Well, for society perhaps not so good. But for a desktop environment
    >> that you are not compelled to use it seems like a good idea.
    >>
    >> Pete

    >
    > There you go, misleading people again. No, there isn't anyone
    > with a bullwhip forcing anyone to use kde at slackware. But for
    > those of us who aren't idiots, the world is not that simple.
    > No one forces anyone to use a car, either, they just create a
    > society where it's a complete drag, if not impossible, to live
    > without one.
    >
    > Slackware does not just "come" with kde on it. It is a part of
    > its default install and is heavily pushed by all the main people
    > at Slackware.
    >
    > kde site:slackware.com
    >
    > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...kware.com&btnG
    >
    > 217 hits
    >
    > On ONE effing website that offers a computer operating system with
    > over a thousand applications on it, not counting kde.
    >
    > Any newbie installing Slackware is going to find himself with kde in
    > front of him after a succesful installation, not a command prompt in
    > an xterm or console.
    >
    > And everyone at Slackware will be pushing him/her to learn kde
    > instead of bash and the Linux operating system.
    >
    > There is no one at Slackware who even suggests to any newbie that
    > they don't have to run kde. That there are other options.


    Interesting. You are quite correct. While I dont compare bash with KDE
    or Gnome you are right about the KDE bias. And there is this:

    http://gnomeslackbuild.org/

    People can as well "learn bash" launching a terminal from KDE or Gnome.

    It's another "wasted effort" distro IMO - in other words the base
    Slackware should be as gnome or KDE friendly and neutral. Since people
    who want choice are no duplicating efforts.

    This makes interesting reading:

    http://lenrek.wordpress.com/2008/09/...-in-slackware/

  8. Re: Slackware and KDE (was: Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?)

    On 2008-10-21, Sidney Lambe wrote:
    >
    > A clarifying note: Slackware does not just "come" with kde on it. It
    > is a part of its default install and is heavily pushed by all the
    > main people at Slackware.



    No, it's not. I neither use nor recommend kde. If someone chooses to
    use it, I have no problem with it, however. I have no aspirations to
    make someone else's choices for them.

    For the record, Alan doesn't use kde, and if memory serves me correctly,
    PiterPunk doesn't either. I don't know about the others, not that it's
    any of your business anyway.


    > Any newbie installing Slackware is going to find himself with kde in
    > front of him after a succesful installation, not a command prompt in
    > an xterm or console.



    Wrong.


    > And everyone will be pushing him/her to learn kde instead of bash and
    > the Linux operating system.



    I don't even use bash, for what it's worth.

    liberty $ echo $SHELL
    /bin/ksh

    -RW

  9. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?

    NOTE: I sincerely apologize to everyone suffering through this thread,
    but on the off chance that some new user is reading Sid's worthless
    drivel and not realizing that he's so full of **** his eyes are brown,
    I feel obliged to set the record straight.


    On 2008-10-22, Sidney Lambe wrote:
    >
    > There you go, misleading people again. No, there isn't anyone
    > with a bullwhip forcing anyone to use kde at slackware. But for
    > those of us who aren't idiots, the world is not that simple.
    > No one forces anyone to use a car, either, they just create a
    > society where it's a complete drag, if not impossible, to live
    > without one.



    It's not impossible at all. We all live with the results of the choices
    we make. Some of us make choices which enable us to function perfectly
    well without an automobile, and others do not. Some of us actually
    *like* having an automobile. Do you have one? If so, then you just
    undermined your own argument (not that it was worth a fart in the wind
    anyway)...


    > Slackware does not just "come" with kde on it. It is a part of
    > its default install and is heavily pushed by all the main people
    > at Slackware.



    Wrong. This is already debunked in not less than two other posts
    by two different people involved in the Slackware project (myself
    included).


    > Any newbie installing Slackware is going to find himself with kde in
    > front of him after a succesful installation, not a command prompt in
    > an xterm or console.



    Wrong. This is already debunked in my other recent post.


    > And everyone at Slackware will be pushing him/her to learn kde
    > instead of bash and the Linux operating system.



    Wrong. This is already debunked in my other recent post.


    > There is no one at Slackware who even suggests to any newbie that
    > they don't have to run kde. That there are other options.



    Of course. That's why I always recommend Xfce to users, right?

    -RW

  10. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?

    On 2008-10-22, Hadron wrote:
    >
    > Sidney Lambe writes:
    >
    >> And everyone at Slackware will be pushing him/her to learn kde
    >> instead of bash and the Linux operating system.
    >>
    >> There is no one at Slackware who even suggests to any newbie that
    >> they don't have to run kde. That there are other options.

    >
    > Interesting. You are quite correct. While I dont compare bash with KDE
    > or Gnome you are right about the KDE bias. And there is this:



    No, he's not correct.


    > It's another "wasted effort" distro IMO



    What makes you qualified to decide that my effort (and that of the other
    people who work on Slackware) is wasted? I didn't realize it was that
    simple; that being the case:

    Your parents' copulation was a "wasted effort" ****ing. Too bad they
    didn't produce something of value.


    > in other words the base Slackware should be as gnome or KDE
    > friendly and neutral.



    Typical. Not only do you think you're qualified to decide whether
    our effort is wasted, you also think you're entitled to decide what
    we spend our time and effort doing. Why don't you stop wearing your
    ass for a hat?


    > Since people who want choice are no duplicating efforts.



    Oh, waaahhh waaahh. Go whine to your mommy about her wasted effort
    with your father. Tell her she should have swallowed.


    > This makes interesting reading:
    >
    > http://lenrek.wordpress.com/2008/09/...-in-slackware/



    No, it really wasn't, but you can certainly pretend.

    -RW

  11. Re: Slackware and KDE (was: Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?)

    Sidney Lambe wrote:

    > A clarifying note: Slackware does not just "come" with kde on it. It
    > is a part of its default install and is heavily pushed by all the
    > main people at Slackware.


    That's odd. I just installed Slackware-12.1 on a laptop where I skipped
    installing KDE to save disk space (I may yet go back and install some
    or all of it, since I actually like some of the apps).

    I've been using Slackware since long before there was a KDE, and frankly
    have never seen any indication that there is even a hint of truth in
    these claims of yours. KDE is available, and may be installed or not,
    and once installed it's available as an option and may be used or not.
    Users who opt to use it are certainly able to run non-KDE apps (including
    a "standard" xterm), and users who opt to use something else are able
    to still use KDE applications (I have a preference for Konqueror for a
    graphics browser, for instance; easily started at the command-line or
    added to an Fvwm menu).

    The user is not "bound" to KDE in any way, shape, or form. They're free
    to fire up an Xterm (or "Konsole" by default, if they can stand it) and
    work as anyone else might in an Xterm without any KDE around.

    I've examined KDE as a working "environment", and mostly I find it
    rather uninvasive, which is good. I make a point to replace the
    console/terminal-emulator app with good-old Xterm, though, because I
    don't particularly care for Konsole. For my usual working environment,
    I still prefer Fvwm, though that's probably because I have been using
    it for so long the configuration I have is very familiar. My biggest
    complaint about other window-managers/environments (and frankly I've
    given only Xfce and KDE more than a brief try) is that they aren't quite
    as configurable (or perhaps not as easily configurable and I don't have
    the patience to figure out how to make them behave just like Fvwm, in
    which case I'm probably better off just using Fvwm, which incidentally
    behaves exactly like Fvwm).

    I'm likely going to examine Lxde that was recommended recently on this
    newsgroup. Maybe on that same KDE-less laptop ...

    > Any newbie installing Slackware is going to find himself with kde in
    > front of him after a succesful installation, not a command prompt in
    > an xterm or console.


    That's obviously not true, suggesting that you haven't done so much as
    research your claim, let alone actually install Slackware yourself.
    Slackware, by default, boots into run-level 3, which (on a Slackware
    system, at least) is multi-user, with no X. The corrected version should
    read "Any newbie installing Slackware is going to find himself staring
    at a CLI login prompt, then a command prompt at a text console after
    logging in."

    Don't take my word for it, though. Go ahead and try installing Slackware
    sometime (with or without KDE; you get to choose, and choice is good).
    You'll see for yourself.

    Don't bother following up. In fact, please just killfile me now.
    Feel free to do so publically, amid fanfare about how you'll only
    read my headers and that you can't find any posts from me on Google.

    I didn't write any of this for your sake, but rather for the sake of
    others who might be new enough to Linux to wonder whether there is even
    a shred of truth to what you've written. There isn't, and I'm simply
    trying to clarify that. The sooner you go away and find a new pet-peeve,
    and a new "name" to champion it, the sooner we can all get on with our
    own sorry lives ...

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

    Network and Systems analyst Concordia University
    Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  12. Re: Slackware and KDE (was: Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?)

    notbob wrote:

    > The default for startx has to be something. It's kde.


    Actually, it's configurable, both at install-time and afterwards.
    Users logging in can even select a different window-manager/environment
    at login time.

    "Sidney" has no idea whatsoever what "he" is talking about. "he" is
    making false claims, likely in an attempt to create interest in "Tom's"
    "ODE" methane-ware.

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

    Network and Systems analyst Concordia University
    Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  13. Re: Slackware and KDE (was: Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?)

    Robby Workman wrote:

    > liberty $ echo $SHELL
    > /bin/ksh


    After all you've done for the community, don't you think you can lay off
    the self-punishment??? ;-)

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

    Network and Systems analyst Concordia University
    Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  14. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?

    Sidney Lambe wrote:

    > There is no one at Slackware who even suggests to any newbie that
    > they don't have to run kde. That there are other options.


    The Slackware folks don't need to make any such suggestion. The options
    are presented at installation time, and available in an obvious menu at
    login time (assuming a system running in run-level 4, which is not the
    default). Any semi-literate Linux newbie will find these options with
    little or no trouble. I'm sorry you appear to have missed them.

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

    Network and Systems analyst Concordia University
    Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  15. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?

    ["Followup-To:" header set to alt.os.linux.slackware.]

    On 2008-10-22, Sylvain Robitaille wrote:
    > Sidney Lambe wrote:

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^

    > The Slackware folks don't need to make any such suggestion. The options
    > are presented at installation time, and available in an obvious menu at
    > login time (assuming a system running in run-level 4, which is not the
    > default). Any semi-literate Linux newbie will find these options with
    > little or no trouble. I'm sorry you appear to have missed them.


    You *did* specify "semi-literate". ;-)

    --keith

    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  16. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?




    On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Robby Workman wrote:

    > Your parents' copulation was a "wasted effort" ****ing. Too bad they
    > didn't produce something of value.






    --
    Res

  17. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?

    Keith Keller wrote:

    > You *did* specify "semi-literate". ;-)


    That's right ...

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

    Network and Systems analyst Concordia University
    Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  18. Re: Slackware and KDE (was: Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?)

    ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.misc.]
    > On 2008-10-21, Sidney Lambe wrote:
    >>
    >> A clarifying note: Slackware does not just "come" with kde on it. It
    >> is a part of its default install and is heavily pushed by all the
    >> main people at Slackware.

    >
    >
    > No, it's not. I neither use nor recommend kde.


    Oh wow! One person at Slackware doesn't use or recommend kde.

    There might even be more than one. So what?

    The vast majority obviously do, because the organization
    does. Big time. The leadership certainly does.

    [delete]

    Sid

    --
    contact: http://tinyurl.com/5jxzoj
    googlegroups users see:
    http://tinyurl.com/5mbs7c

  19. Re: Slackware and KDE (was: Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?)

    ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.misc.]
    Sylvain Robitaille wrote:
    > Sidney Lambe wrote:
    >
    >> A clarifying note: Slackware does not just "come" with kde on it. It
    >> is a part of its default install and is heavily pushed by all the
    >> main people at Slackware.

    >
    > That's odd. I just installed Slackware-12.1 on a laptop where I skipped
    > installing KDE to save disk space (I may yet go back and install some
    > or all of it, since I actually like some of the apps).


    Yeh. And you aren't a newbie.

    (this is looking to be a spectacularly stupid post)

    >
    > I've been using Slackware since long before there was a KDE, and frankly
    > have never seen any indication that there is even a hint of truth in
    > these claims of yours. KDE is available, and may be installed or not,


    And what newbie from the Windows or Mac world knows enough about Linux
    to eschew kde?

    None.

    > and once installed it's available as an option and may be used or not.
    > Users who opt to use it are certainly able to run non-KDE apps (including
    > a "standard" xterm), and users who opt to use something else are able
    > to still use KDE applications (I have a preference for Konqueror for a
    > graphics browser, for instance; easily started at the command-line or
    > added to an Fvwm menu).


    That isn't my point.

    >
    > The user is not "bound" to KDE in any way, shape, or form. They're free
    > to fire up an Xterm (or "Konsole" by default, if they can stand it) and
    > work as anyone else might in an Xterm without any KDE around.


    And what newbie from the Windows/Mac world knows enough to do that?

    >
    > I've examined KDE as a working "environment", and mostly I find it
    > rather uninvasive, which is good.


    Right. "uninvasive". It's larger than my entire Slackware 12.0
    installation.

    You are simply lying. You obviously know better.

    > I make a point to replace the
    > console/terminal-emulator app with good-old Xterm, though, because I
    > don't particularly care for Konsole. For my usual working environment,
    > I still prefer Fvwm, though that's probably because I have been using
    > it for so long the configuration I have is very familiar. My biggest
    > complaint about other window-managers/environments (and frankly I've
    > given only Xfce and KDE more than a brief try) is that they aren't quite
    > as configurable (or perhaps not as easily configurable and I don't have
    > the patience to figure out how to make them behave just like Fvwm, in
    > which case I'm probably better off just using Fvwm, which incidentally
    > behaves exactly like Fvwm).


    One more time: I was not talking about pros like you. I was talking
    about newbies from the Windows/Mac world.

    >
    > I'm likely going to examine Lxde that was recommended recently on this
    > newsgroup. Maybe on that same KDE-less laptop ...
    >
    >> Any newbie installing Slackware is going to find himself with kde in
    >> front of him after a succesful installation, not a command prompt in
    >> an xterm or console.

    >
    > That's obviously not true, suggesting that you haven't done so much as
    > research your claim, let alone actually install Slackware yourself.


    Good grief! Is this fool actually saying that I don't run Slackware?

    > Slackware, by default, boots into run-level 3, which (on a Slackware
    > system, at least) is multi-user, with no X. The corrected version should
    > read "Any newbie installing Slackware is going to find himself staring
    > at a CLI login prompt, then a command prompt at a text console after
    > logging in."
    >
    > Don't take my word for it, though. Go ahead and try installing Slackware
    > sometime (with or without KDE; you get to choose, and choice is good).
    > You'll see for yourself.


    What a typical aols punk you are.

    >
    > Don't bother following up.


    You wish.

    > In fact, please just killfile me now.
    > Feel free to do so publically, amid fanfare about how you'll only
    > read my headers and that you can't find any posts from me on Google.


    ??????

    >
    > I didn't write any of this for your sake, but rather for the sake of
    > others who might be new enough to Linux to wonder whether there is even
    > a shred of truth to what you've written. There isn't, and I'm simply
    > trying to clarify that. The sooner you go away and find a new pet-peeve,
    > and a new "name" to champion it, the sooner we can all get on with our
    > own sorry lives ...


    Good grief!

    > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca
    >
    > Network and Systems analyst Concordia University
    > Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------------


    There you have it. The technocrat playing games with words to protect
    his power.

    Can't have people actually learning Linux or he wouldn't be able to
    play god on the slackware forums.

    That's how technocrats operate: They work to keep others ignorant
    and dependent.

    Of _course_ there are people at Slackware who don't run kde. You
    can't run Linux from kde. Or gnome. Or xfce. The purpose of those
    interfaces are to make people dependent on assholes like this fellow.

    You certainly can't create and maintain a distro with it.

    And anyone who denies that Slackware pushes kde is either lying
    or ignorant.

    And because this fellow is obviously not ignorant about Slackware,
    he's lying.

    Sid

    --
    contact: http://tinyurl.com/5jxzoj
    googlegroups users see:
    http://tinyurl.com/5mbs7c

  20. Re: WTF is it with ubuntu?

    In alt.os.linux.slackware Sidney Lambe wrote:
    > No one forces anyone to use a car, either, they just create a
    > society where it's a complete drag, if not impossible, to live
    > without one.


    Strange, I seem to have lived 56 years without ever having possessed
    a car. When I _really_ need one I'll rent one for a day or so.
    I'm not really missing it, and in Delft they make it a drag OWNING
    a car (the centre, where I live, is car-free and just to get to your
    home you have to buy a monthly permit).
    --
    ************************************************** *****************
    ** Eef Hartman, Delft University of Technology, dept. SSC/ICT **
    ** e-mail: E.J.M.Hartman@tudelft.nl, fax: +31-15-278 7295 **
    ** snail-mail: P.O. Box 5031, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands **
    ************************************************** *****************

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast