On 2007-11-18, Doug Mentohl <doug_mentohl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Some believe that certain Linux distributors intentionally introduce
> issues to generate support incidents. Red Hat is high on that suspect
> list", Erik FUD Sep 2002
>
> "I recently read this in another forum: 'Red Hat has, at some stage,
> made deliberate errors to earn money from support' .. if that's what
> people are saying, then comparing something to RHEL-quality might not be
> good)", Tim Smith Nov 2007
>
> A pathological liar quoting pathological another liar ...
>
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/6a3389bd549b042e?dmode=source
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/519217dd47a36757
Why do you have a post by Erik up there? I was quoting Roy Schestowitz:
<http://www.digg.com/linux_unix/rPath_on_Red_Hat_s_appliance_strategy_Some_assembly_required>
I hope Roy is not too upset that you just called him a pathological
liar.
BTW, how come you cut out the part of my post where I said I did not
believe that Red Hat did that?
|
|
