Re: gcc3.x issues

2002-02-11 Thread Nat Lanza

On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 12:59, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
 These comments are not useless, most committers have day jobs that
 unfortunetly preclude them from having time to work on every little
 feature request.  Furthermore asking for patches is the exact
 opposite of being smug at least in the way of flaunting one's commit
 priveledges, it's providing the user an opportunity to present work
 for inclusion into the project.

Surely you see the difference between That's an interesting idea; can
you generate some patches so we can take a look and see how it works
out? and WhereTF is your patch to do this?.

One provides an opportunity for users to contribute, and the other is a
snarling, rude dismissal that really doesn't do very much to encourage
people to stick around and help out.


--nat


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: gcc3.x issues

2002-02-07 Thread Nat Lanza

On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 12:59, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
 These comments are not useless, most committers have day jobs that
 unfortunetly preclude them from having time to work on every little
 feature request.  Furthermore asking for patches is the exact
 opposite of being smug at least in the way of flaunting one's commit
 priveledges, it's providing the user an opportunity to present work
 for inclusion into the project.

Surely you see the difference between That's an interesting idea; can
you generate some patches so we can take a look and see how it works
out? and WhereTF is your patch to do this?.

One provides an opportunity for users to contribute, and the other is a
snarling, rude dismissal that really doesn't do very much to encourage
people to stick around and help out.


--nat


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: gcc3.x issues

2002-02-06 Thread Nat Lanza

On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 23:46, Mike Barcroft wrote:
 Yes, absolutely.  Every minute David spends replying to these idiotic
 suggestions wastes valuable project time.  How many FreeBSD users need
 to compile Java to machine code?  2, 3, 4 people?  How hard is it to
 use `pkg_add -r' and rearrange your PATH to make a stock GCC work?

You know, people might be less persistent about these idiotic
suggestions if they got treated with some civility and respect.

It's a lot more meaningful and useful to receive an explanation, even a
brief one, about why your suggestion isn't good than it is to receive
personal abuse. If you simply abuse someone, they're just going to think
you're a jerk, not that their ideas are bad.

More flies with honey, and all that.

I've noticed a lot of nastiness in this thread, and it's really pretty
disappointing. Yes, you're all busy people. Yes, this is a volunteer
project. Yes, people are never satisfied with what others do for them
for free. That sucks, sure. But it doesn't make it okay to treat people
like crap for daring to disagree with you.


--nat


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: md, current and stable

2001-02-06 Thread Nat Lanza

John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Releases are bad enough as is w/o having to add in a multitude of
 hacks so that one can roll a 5.0 release on a 2.2.x box, etc.

Sure, but allowing 4.x users to do a source upgrade to 5.0 makes the
upgrade path much more flexible. There's a big difference between
"support source upgrades from version N-1" and "support source
upgrades from all versions".


--nat

-- 
nat lanza - research programmer, parallel data lab, cmu scs
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~magus/
there are no whole truths; all truths are half-truths -- alfred north whitehead


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: md, current and stable

2001-02-06 Thread Nat Lanza

Poul-Henning Kamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 You don't need "make release" to do a source upgrade from 4.x to 5.x...

You're right. Whoops.

I can still see it being useful in some cases, though, and as long as
the changes necessary to support it aren't too ugly it might be
worthwhile.


--nat

-- 
nat lanza - research programmer, parallel data lab, cmu scs
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~magus/
there are no whole truths; all truths are half-truths -- alfred north whitehead


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: Confusing error messages from shell image activation

2000-12-10 Thread Nat Lanza

Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Whether or not it's part of FreeBSD is immaterial. It's part of the
 distribution that comes from FreeBSD, and is treated differentlyh from
 locally installed software (whether written locally or by a third
 party) in every case *except* where it installs - and that's only
 because it's installed in the wrong place.
 
 In other words, "It's not part of FreeBSD" is a rationalization.

Your argument doesn't make much sense to me.

So if I compile sawfish myself I should install it in /usr/local, but if
I install a FreeBSD package for it, it should never go in /usr/local?

If I grab a sawfish FreeBSD package from the sawfish website, where
should that install? /usr/local? /opt? /usr/pkg?

Third party software is third party software, no matter who compiled
and packaged it.

If I install a package of third-party software, the end result should
be about the same as if I compiled and installed it by hand -- the
packaged software is a convenience, not a fundamentally different
entity.


--nat

-- 
nat lanza - research programmer, parallel data lab, cmu scs
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~magus/
there are no whole truths; all truths are half-truths -- alfred north whitehead


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: Confusing error messages from shell image activation

2000-12-10 Thread Nat Lanza

"David O'Brien" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 No, the issue is one of "preciousness".  In other words why backup
 software that I can just do `pkg_add' to get again?  Or if I want to
 easily start from scratch and update all my FreeBSD Packages?

This is an entirely reasonable argument; I don't tend to group
software this way, so I hadn't thought of it like this.

This is probably because in my world, we use a somewhat different
model for software installation -- CMU is heavily dependent on AFS,
and software tends to be installed on local machines out of backed-up
AFS volumes through something like depot. So every package has its own
little directory tree, and it's all merged together at install time
into /usr/local or /usr/contributed or something like that. So we
don't differentiate how precious software is by where it's installed
-- the directories it's installed _from_ are the key bit, and the
destination directories can be wiped and recreated at any time.


--nat

-- 
nat lanza - research programmer, parallel data lab, cmu scs
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~magus/
there are no whole truths; all truths are half-truths -- alfred north whitehead


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: linux emulation

2000-11-01 Thread Nat Lanza

Marcel Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Linux has the distinction between block and character devices. I don't
 see any evidence that block devices can be accessed as character devices
 as well (ie: there's /dev/fd0, but no /dev/rfd0).

You can do this in Linux, but the way it works is pretty psychotic.
They have a special driver that provides a raw character device
interface for block devices, and you have to run a userland utility
to bind a block device to one of their /dev/rawN devices.

This is new as of 2.3/2.4, but there are patches to 2.2 to allow
it. Actually, it might have been backported and included with later
2.2 kernels, but I haven't been paying a lot of attention.


--nat

-- 
nat lanza - research programmer, parallel data lab, cmu scs
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~magus/
there are no whole truths; all truths are half-truths -- alfred north whitehead


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: AFS.

2000-08-31 Thread Nat Lanza

Garance A Drosihn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Note that there will still be a commercial AFS offering, and
 this new open-source AFS option.  The open-source one will
 not include some things from the commercial package.  I am
 not sure what things will be missing.

From what I've heard, the bits missing will be the customized vendor
fscks (as they require vendor source that IBM can't give away) and
tsm (an AIX subsystem that I know nothing about).

Also, I'm told that xdr will be in a separate distribution due to
licensing issues.

The vendor fscks and the AIX stuff are irrelevant to a FreeBSD system, 
and if xdr is still available, then things are fine.


--nat

-- 
nat lanza - research programmer, parallel data lab, cmu scs
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~magus/
there are no whole truths; all truths are half-truths -- alfred north whitehead


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message