[linux-elitists] [RANT] Debian the Elitist Distribution?

Mike MacCana mikem@cyber.com.au
Sun Feb 15 20:30:51 PST 2004


On Sun, 15 Feb 2004, Greg Folkert wrote:

> On Sun, 2004-02-15 at 22:47, Mike MacCana wrote:
> > On Sun, 15 Feb 2004, Greg Folkert wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 2004-02-15 at 21:15, Mike MacCana wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 15 Feb 2004, Greg Folkert wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Reason being, it is the distribution where every architecture (11
> > > > > officially supported right now) is treated the same. Can you say that
> > > > > about Mandrake, RedHat, Gentoo?
> > > >
> > > > Yes. Red Hat supports seven architectures. Its not eleven, but to be
> > > > honest, I don't give a fuck about installing Linux on my Atari.
> > > >
> > > > The architecture thing is pretty much a myth.
> >
> > > Superciliousness is quite obvious... 31337 evidence... PASS.
> > >
> > > And BTW, I meant *CURRENTLY* supporting those architectures, not past
> > > tense or unofficially. It DOES make a difference.
> >
> > I do too. x86, Itanium II, AMD64, PowerPC iSeries, PowerPC pSeries,
> > mainframe ZSeries, S390.
>
> Impressive resume.
>
> > If I was talking about unoffically, I'd mention that there's Red Hat
> > staff paid to maintain the Sparc port by Sun.
>
> Ohhhh, inside information... Wow.
>
> > > BTW, I give a fuck about those architectures. I use about 5 of them you
> > > probably never HAVE used.
> >
> > Ohh. That's three, maybe three point five geek points there.
>
> Like it matters.

Hence the sarcasm, and hence the surprise at your massively aggressive yet
completely un

> > > Stay in your Intel world.
> >
> > Who said anything about Intel exclusivity.
>
> You definitely implied it.

Um, no. You did. You're the one that said 'Stay in your Intel world'.
Call me crazy, but that implies that my world, is, you know. Intel.


> > > Stay the fuck out of
> > > any arch that really works, you'll just get in the way.
> >
> > Ooooooh. Please get angier. That way people reading my post, your
> > rather presumptive agressive reply, and my response to that will know
> > exactly how dumb you were to use such language without doing five seconds
> > worth of fact checking on google.
>
> You were making assumptions as well. I really could careless about your
> "credentials"... go flash your resume somewhere else.

You implied Red Hat was limited to intel architecture. I pointed out that
isn't true. Not really much of a 'credentials flash'. You could say 'ah,
you're right after verifying what I've said' but that's too much of
a stretch for your bruised ego.

I'd like to point out your ego would be less bruised if you were less
aggro in your reponse or did some basic fact checking.

> BTW, Superciliousness do you understand what it means?

Yes.

Mike




More information about the linux-elitists mailing list