Re: resolution of symlinks in asdf

Christophe Rhodes <[email protected]> wrote:

>> >>> Forgive me for being blunt: you are not providing enough evidence
>> >>> in your messages that you are reading mine with enough care to
>> >>> extract information and ideas from them, and you are not providing
>> >>> any information in your own for me to respond to.
>> >
>> > I'm sorry you feel that way.
>> 
>> But apparently not sorry enough to review this thread for pieces of
>> information that you might have missed.  Perhaps instead of being
>> sorry about my feelings you could change your behaviour?  (I am of
>> course aware that that particular expression of apparent contrition is
>> usually nothing of the sort, but I'll try not to let that affect my
>> judgment.)

Christophe, I don't know you and I would never presume to think I know
what you're thinking.  The "I'm sorry" was an expression of
disappointment the discussion had taken a such a turn.

I had, in fact, read your emails thoroughly.  Each one several times.
You are assuming that since I did not reply in the way you wanted that
I didn't take care with my replies.  What I see are two people that
don't have an understanding of what the other is trying to
communicate.  I would not presume that you are misbehaving just
because you don't agree with me.  That appears to be what you have
done, since you took this conversation into the realm of counseling.

cliki.net appears to be done, and has ever since I've been trying to
read about ASDF-Binary-Location.  My remaining action on this matter
is to read about that.

Kevin