Colin Law schreef op 09-10-2016 16:48:
On 9 October 2016 at 15:43, Xen <l...@xenhideout.nl> wrote:
Colin Law schreef op 09-10-2016 14:38:
On 9 October 2016 at 12:56, Xen <l...@xenhideout.nl> wrote:
Colin Law schreef op 09-10-2016 9:28:
...
I was not commenting on any particular topic, merely pointing out
that
that Ralf (I think) said there are some things that Linux "does not
allow" and you answered this with a post referring to things that
Linux "can't" do and the two things are not the same. I also stated
that things that Linux will not allow are generally security
related.
Is any of that untrue?
You might as well state that the sun is not green and that might
also not
be
untrue. But the question is whether that is relevant or related or
whether
it is a showstopper.
That is one question, but as I said it was not my point. I was
merely
pointing out that you had misread or misinterpreted the earlier post.
Nothing more or less than that.
And that is simply not true. And apparently you are arguing for the
sake of
arguing.
In what way is it not true, it was my first post on this thread and
all I said was:
"I think there is a difference between *can't* meaning is not able to
and *won't allow* meaning there is something specifically stopping
that from happening. The *won't allow* features are generally for
security reasons."
I've responded to this to Ralf, but...
I had said Windows can do something that is impossible in Linux.
Ralf responded by saying that it is allowed in Windows but not in Linux
and that that would probably be for a good reason, or something of the
kind.
So it was Ralf who muddled the waters between "can" and "be allowed to
do" and not me.
--
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
