Re: will apt-rpm be officially included in RH in the futurereleases?

["Andrew Smith" <rhml k1k2 com>]

> On Fri, 2002-01-18 at 17:28, dTd wrote:
> 
>> More defensive dribble when no offense was made. Trond, you need to
>> relax.
> 
> 	I've been more-or-less following this thread and I don't see
> Trond's
> reply as "defensive dribble".  Based on the rest of the thread his
> answer was just fine.
> 
>> I was referring to apt-rpm, my reply has nothing to do
>> with binary  modules or the nVidia thread. Reread my
>> reply which you have generously included and tell me where I said I
>> want redhat to support anything other than what they supply.
>> As a matter of fact I read it as being in complete agreement with your
>> reply, but you seem to have an issue here, maybe it concerns something
>> you previously said.
>> But continue the defense if it makes you feel better.
> 
> 	It seems to me that you are pretty bent about the way Trond
> replied to
> your email.  If anyone needs to relax I think it's you.

Actually - I think the problem relates to my email where I pointed out
that RedHat was actually quite good in supporting a Linux that has other
non-RedHat stuff on it as long as it wasn't binary-only-kernel modules
(nVidia)
I included his comments coz I thought it was obvious that I agreed with
him and disagreed with the earlier email
His reply to my post shows he didn't see that! :-) Oh well.
-- 
-Cheers
-Andrew

MS ... if only he hadn't been hang gliding!