[arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises

[Nathan Wayde]

On 02/12/09 09:55, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Thanks to enough input i have learned two things of this thread:
>
> 1) The problem IS upstream related. Some packages do enable
>    dbus when it is available, for the convenience of those users
>    who do not understand what dbus is and hence need it.
>
>    Archs philosophy dictates, that if the upstream is retarded,
>    so shall be the package. I used this as argument, and i shall
>    comply to it equally.
>
> 2) I am in fact the minority, not those who see linux
>    as a free windows copy. Hence i should
>     2.1) stfu and obey the will of the mass
>     2.2) find or found a distro that
>          is not based on the will of the mass
>
> The combination of 1 and 2 invalidates everything
> i have said in this thread.
>
> Jan did a great job at packaging clearly broken packages
> in the least harmful way for the majority of users,
> who happen to have a microsoft windows background.
>
> Sorry about being too ignorant to see these in the first place.
> I'll go do 2.1 or 2.2 now.
> have a nice day.
>
lol, i didn't see that one coming.