On Tuesday 30 October 2007, Warren Young wrote:
> Tim Johnson wrote:
> >> It isn't "broken," per se.
> > When you say that it isn't "broken", could you please elaborate?
> Once again: It seems to me that you're seeing a purposeful choice of
> configuration. It could very well be that the configuration makes sense
> in some one's use. The fact that it breaks for you doesn't mean the
> configuration makes no sense.
> I don't know for a fact that this is what's going on. I don't use
> Ubuntu. I'm just trying to find an explanation for why it is the way it
> > And thanks in advance, because, from where I'm sitting, time is money
> > and I know that it takes time to answers these emails.
> I'm glad you see that, but why then are you continuing to argue back and
> forth instead of going to mysql.com and getting a different set of
> binaries to try? You could have done that about five times in the time
> it's took to have this exchange. Even if it didn't work, we'd be
> farther along towards a solution by now.
I am not arguing. I am being cautious. If I were on a slack or redhat system,
which I'm more familiar with, I would have reinstalled already.
I'm going to refer this to a a debian or ubuntu list and see what responses I
get before I do anything further.
Thanks for your help. Don't make an argument where none exists :-).