From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FgpVW-00077E-Mi for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 18 May 2006 20:54:07 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4IKqo16020972; Thu, 18 May 2006 20:52:50 GMT Received: from smtp-out3.blueyonder.co.uk (smtp-out3.blueyonder.co.uk [195.188.213.6]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4IKhnak005188 for ; Thu, 18 May 2006 20:43:49 GMT Received: from [172.23.170.140] (helo=anti-virus02-07) by smtp-out3.blueyonder.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FgpLZ-0006Im-KD for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 18 May 2006 21:43:49 +0100 Received: from [213.121.151.206] (helo=snowdrop.home) by asmtp-out6.blueyonder.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1FgpLZ-0001t6-5E for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 18 May 2006 21:43:49 +0100 Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 21:43:27 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles Message-ID: <20060518214327.443c53e5@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <200605182228.00195.pauldv@gentoo.org> References: <1147877875.16876.21.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <200605182033.05484.pauldv@gentoo.org> <20060518194236.5ac9dfe6@snowdrop.home> <200605182228.00195.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.1.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 7effb259-e8c2-4b62-8250-b5b2f20a978a X-Archives-Hash: 344a94fb29b70211aeb250dc947231ad On Thu, 18 May 2006 22:27:59 +0200 Paul de Vrieze wrote: | > Circular argument. | | Let me repeat it in primary school language. | | A supported statement is one which has the form: | | ... ... | | In short a supported statement has reasons that aim to argue why the | statement is true. And your definition of a primary package manager is: | You say that there is no such a thing as a primary package manager, | but fail to state any reason (here or in other mails) as to why this | is true. Instead of arguing why my support is false you just say that | I am saying things that are not true. This is an unbased accusation. No, I am claiming that your entire idea of a primary package manager is based upon circular logic and is thus invalid. It's like trying to debate the existence of green happiness -- since the thing the words describe is meaningless, there's no logical argument to be had. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list