| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 17:07:42 +0200 |
| 4 |
Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> just as I thought, certain folks had their lessons now it's |
| 7 |
> maybe worth contributing someting, it starts again: |
| 8 |
> Critical bugs are simply declared invalid. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=180935 |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Again the old philosophy "what I don't understand is invalid". |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Obviously my contributions are unwelcomed, so I closed the bug. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> BTW, I've already fixed it. If anyone's *seriously* interested, |
| 17 |
> give a note. Evrything else is a waste of my time. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Well, since your awesome efforts last time, everyone here already knows |
| 20 |
you're the most polite bug reporter, absolutely fair and waiting long |
| 21 |
enough for the bug wranglers to catch up, answering nicely to their |
| 22 |
statements and that you're always correct. Your solution to that bug |
| 23 |
was charming and short: Dump what you didn't see making sense (is that |
| 24 |
what you said about things being "invalid"?) -- instead of complicated |
| 25 |
solutions like e.g. using readlink(1) and keeping at least the |
| 26 |
functionality in there. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-hwh |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
PS: free sarcasm for everyone, just pick your favorite above. And sorry |
| 31 |
for adding to the inevitable noise. |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives