FLAME____ Why is the kernel source not included

[Ken Johanson]

> 
> What distro are you implying the kernel source is not available for?  I
> personally know of NO Linux distros that have that failing.
> 

*perhaps* you missed the point - I have never said its not available - 
its is for probably every distro and version, ever!!!!! What I did say, 
sigh, is that its not included in the install discs. The implications of 
this can be read in prior posts.


> It is available both to install using yum, apt-get, and up2date.
> It also is an install option during the initial install, and is on the
> install CD/DVD media for easy install.
> 

Sigh, read prior posts to see why that not save-all.

> You can flame all you want, but it does not change the facts that the
> source is provided and easily accessible to all.  The only reason you
> cannot read the "constitution" is that you do not want to open the door
> to the library.
> 

Sigh.

> It also does not change the fact that you appear to be a zealot against
> Fedora by your flame and either inexperience or deliberate
> contentiousness and refusal to make an attempt to locate it. 

Sorry, its the distro I use on all my business servers. Contrare to your 
statement, I'm trying to keep the distro on par with others by including 
it without users having to go to extra measures.

  Kernel
> source is not installed by default because there are many (nost) users
> who never need to compile a kernel and considerable drive space is
> required for the source code (452 MB in my system).
> 

Then you dont need to install it, as youve asserted - but I - and 
everyone else need it far more than some of the other apps that come 
bundled. So whats more important (rhetorical, I see you appear to prefer 
having the obscure, redundant apps on the inst discs instead)

> Please either get a life and learn or go away and quit whining about
> something that does not exist.
> 
> 

Sorry to not make your day