To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
You stopped any serious discussion right here:
"if opera software gives me the finger I might as well given them the finger, too."
That's what I call flamebaiting. But that might just be me.
Anyway, I'll pull up the lame good ol' reason. They're still serving you a security update for a free browser. If it's too much to bear that they're not updating the repo right away, and you NEED to whine about it on a public forum, you need a vacation, without 'net access.
Sorry 
> They're still serving you a security update for a free
> browser.
Well, I have given them monetary compensation and I don't require anything more than courtesy in return.
> If it's too much to bear that they're not updating
> the repo right away[...]
They claim that 9.22 is a recommended security update, yet won't even have one person spend the 30 seconds or so updating the repo. Apparently they don't recommend it very much.
What's worse, though, is the false sense of reliability. If they don't want to have a deb repo then fine, don't. Just don't have one and then not put "recommended security updates" there, possibly making those vulnerable who think they can count on opera's deb repo. Or at the very least put a warning on http://deb.opera.com saying that the repo is not actively maintained and might be outdated and thus should not be relied upon.




Member since:
2005-07-06
> it is not that hard to install it "the hard way"!
> linux users should not have any problem with this
Of course they don't. You're missing the point, as are mikesname and deathshadow. (I suspect you know this very well and are just flamebaiting.)
The point is that opera software provides opera at deb.opera.com except that it's now outdated for no proper reason. They should either keep deb.opera.com up-to-date with the download page (at least for security updates like this one), or shut it down completely.