To Charles:
I see your intentions but you really want to take this up with Redhat
and some linux advocacy groups. linux-kernel really doesnt need to deal
with things like gcc being broken and such (which I don't think is your
case; check your hardware -- my reason? I've deployed RH 6.2 on 20 or
so server, all scsi, without a hitch. also signal 11 points to memory
problems).
To list:
Could we please come across to users a little more politely? I know its
frustrating when people come barging in complaining about something that
really should be directed somewhere else. But it's heck of alot better
if we don't have a user that later thinks 'Damn, linux developers are
meanies' and then are afraid to ask us questions later which wuld
probably be useful for us. I'm not saying I was right by simply blowing
off Charles by telling him this is the wrong list. I should have pointed
him in the right direction and given quick pointers.
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
> (1) Most nasty-grams were from those who didn't even read the subject.
> And yes, it should be of great concern to those on the linux-
> kernel development list. The most visible advocate of Linux
> is Red Hat. When they drop the ball, it's a concern for all
> the developers.
--
=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Project Lead
Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=====================================================================
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
