On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Tim Mooney wrote:
In regard to: Re: [Imap-uw] 2006d Solaris 64 bit compile issues, Bob said...:
> Oh well, I pretty much expected the responses I got. Amazing how Mark's view
> along with apparently the majority of this respondents can be so limited for
> an open source package like this.
I think you should read what Mark had to say about this issue before
you jump to too many conclusions.
Thank you, Tim (and John Kelly too!).
Indeed, the problem is solely one of lack of resources. Those resources
aren't going to come any faster just because someone scolds me over it not
happening sooner.
Currently, my systems at UW (and home!) are 32-bit. NONE of them are
Solaris. Solaris support is basically a matter of groping/guessing in the
dark, with actual login on someone's Solaris system every few years.
I also face a fairly major effort for imapd at UW which will likely
monopolize most of my work time for the next several months.
The only way, right now, that 64-bit Solaris support will happen any
faster than it would under the normal scheme of things is if either:
(1) someone contributes the necessary changes in a way that can be
deployed in the existing source without breaking existing ports.
[Hint: a massive change of code or build procedures requires
equally massive regression testing and is not likely to happen.
A small set of patches that does the minimum needed to solve the
problem in the existing framework is another matter entire.]
(2) someone gives me a 64-bit Solaris computer for my home so I have a
platform to develop/test on, and enough motivation to donate my
non-work hours to solving this problem. Solaris is always a
crapshoot, and I've currently very reluctant to change things in a
Solaris build since I don't know what I might break.
Not that I really want another computer at home (particularly not SVR4!)
and Annie would probably scream if there was something else that stole
more time away from having a life...
With all this said, it is true that I am a bit bewildered as to the undue
rush to convert to 64-bit.
Nothing in this software is likely to benefit from running in 64-bit mode.
I doubt that it would run any faster; and likely it would run slower
because more memory is consumed. 64-bits, on the surface, seems to have
only the cosmetic benefit of saying "I'm running 64-bit clean with no
32-bit code polluting my system."
So, it is difficult for me to think of reasons why I should drop other
tasks to work on 64-bit. I think that mix administrative tools (better
conversion than mailutil, fixup tool, etc.), support for IMAP extensions
(e.g., CONDSTORE, ANNOTATE, LIST-EXTENSIONS, and especially the LEMONADE
work for mobile device support) are all of much all higher priority.
There's only so much time in a day...or a lifetime...
-- Mark --
http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
_______________________________________________
Imap-uw mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
