sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation
- From: Karsten Behrmann <BearPerson AT gmx.net>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation
- Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:54:27 +0100
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:56:10 +0100
Laurent Wandrebeck <low AT low.ath.cx> wrote:
> > Just curious why do you keep bringing up bi-arch support at the drop of
> > a hat? I didnt even mention sorcery in that email...Its like everything
> > is seen with this lens that distorts whatever is being discussed to a
> > bi-arch discussion.
> Stop it right now. You seem to forget that sorcery is necessary to install
> a system with an iso. Several people asked for an iso that supports
> something else that pure x86. If sorcery aim is to be pure x86,
> that simply _sucks_.
So? write it then.
I am working for source mage pretty much all of my free time. Still, I
cannot do everything.
All I say to this discussion is,
I will not write nor maintain bi-arch support for/on the ISO while there
are still users coming into #sourcemage being really confused by the
installer. A seasoned SMGL pro has no problem with the ISO,
that is sure, but nearly everyone else seems to.
(ISO team, please don't be offended, it's just a fact that I work to
correct)
I cannot work on three things at once.
Of course, this does not have to keep you from doing bi-arch all on
your own. We are an open-source project, any modifications you want to
do you can. But be prepared it will be a hell of a lot of work.
I can only slightly ironically say "Have a lot of fun!"
You can do what you want. You can vote to make the devs to what you
want. But you cannot by yourself make half of the SMGL team dance to
your tune.
So Far,
Karsten
Attachment:
pgpSkCqAVOVmn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation
, (continued)
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation, Andrew, 01/26/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation, Benoit PAPILLAULT, 01/26/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation,
Andrew, 01/26/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation,
Laurent Wandrebeck, 01/26/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation,
Andrew, 01/26/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation, Karsten Behrmann, 01/26/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation,
Laurent Wandrebeck, 01/26/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation, Andrew, 01/26/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation, Eric Sandall, 01/26/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation, David Kowis, 01/26/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation,
Karsten Behrmann, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic], Benoit PAPILLAULT, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic], Andrew, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic], Eric Sandall, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic], David Kowis, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic], Eric Sandall, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic], David Kowis, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic], Eric Sandall, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic], David Kowis, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic], Andrew, 01/27/2005
- [SM-Discuss] ISO: Graphical installers (was: ISO generation [back on-topic]), Karsten Behrmann, 01/27/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] OFF-TOPIC bi-arch request WAS: ISO generation,
Andrew, 01/26/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation,
Laurent Wandrebeck, 01/26/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.