I sorry, just wanted to be a part of the lols On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Remco <remc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Derek Broughton<de...@pointerstop.ca> > wrote: > > Remco wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 1:50 AM, Derek Broughton<de...@pointerstop.ca> > >> wrote: > >>> Remco wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:52 PM, David > >>>> Schlesinger<david.schlesin...@access-company.com> wrote: > >>>>> As Derek pointed out, Wine is indeed in the universal repository. You > >>>>> were completely mistaken about it, rendering your argument > meaningless. > >>>>> The appropriate response at that point is to say, "I was wrong", not > to > >>>>> try to switch to a completely different argument in mid-stream. > >>>>> Nobody's come within a parsec of suggesting that the codecs you > mention > >>>>> should be part of the default install. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I guess you're really not getting my point. I was actually trying to > >>>> let you work that one out by comparing it to the codecs. > >>> > >>> That's not an argument, it's a complete misdirection. The > >>> non-free Codecs _aren't_ in Ubuntu repositories, Wine is. > >> > >> You're arguing semantics. I don't care about semantics. > > > > Sorry, but no. You are pretending to have a rational discussion, while > > dismissing perfectly valid arguments. > > What's your argument against my position? That I maybe made a semantic > cock-up in a throwaway comparison? That's a great one... How does that > relate to Mono? > > >> The codecs are > >> not-in-Ubuntu the same way as Wine, because they are not installed, > > > > No, they are not. The codecs are NOT in Ubuntu at all. Show me where > they > > exist in the repositories. Wine is in the repos. > > If the codecs are not in the repos, then I'm amazed as to how they got > onto my system. Clearly, the ffmpeg project (yeah, universe) doesn't > exist. Besides, how is the exact location of the codecs relevant? I > can install them in the same way as I install Wine. > > >> Wine isn't installed because > >> Mark Shuttleworth doesn't want Ubuntu to be cheap Windows: > >> > >> http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/11/1220219 > >> http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/05/1546230 > > > > Excuse me, but when did slashdot become an authoritative source of > knowledge > > of the workings of Mark Shuttleworth's mind (or of anything else, for > that > > matter). In any case, the first of those simply says Wine won't be > > preinstalled on Dell minis, and the second is even more vague - it says > that > > Shuttleworth isn't staking the future of Ubuntu on Wine. Neither one > says > > that Ubuntu will ever _not_ include Wine. > > Slashdot is not the source. Look one click further and you'll find the > actual source. You just fell in the same trap as the Wikipedia > naysayers. It's just easy reference. And if you don't want to see this > as the motivation for not including Wine, then so be it. I think it's > pretty clear why Wine is not supposed to be on the default install. > > Remco > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss > -- Paige Adele Thompson Mobile: 206-446-630 E-mail/GTalk: erra...@devel.ws
-- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
