We do not (and have never) searched the known
Universe for possible
conflicts that may possibly live in somebody's home
directory.
They're just not relevant, no matter what time/date
stamp might be on
that file.
You're asking for us to be reasonable, so I think we
should ask the
same
James, you make good points. Certainly nobody can search every nook
and cranny or know what is in someone's head. However, this
particular scenario is specific because a conflict was brought to
attention.
The crucial question is this: is the PSARC / ARC / whatever you
want to call
Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you please explain why some people including you try to convert
a general problem (that I mentioned some time ago) into a personal problem?
I'm not making it personal. I don't see how you read that into what I
wrote. I was just applying
Bart Blanquart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The ARC looked at the information given to it and decided that
retaining compatibility around the ImageMagick command names (that
had been shipped before in SFW, and exist as such on many other
platforms on which the ImageMagick tools are
UNIX admin writes:
The crucial question is this: is the PSARC / ARC / whatever you want to call
it -- let's call it the process so *rigid* and so *inflexible* that, even
when someone external reports a conflict, nothing can be done about it?
There's no conflict. Nobody (not even Joerg) has
[Please refrain from copying me on these mails; I, like everyone
involved, am on this mailing list]
On 20 Dec 2007, at 13:19, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Bart Blanquart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The ARC looked at the information given to it and decided that
retaining compatibility around the
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you please explain why some people including you try to convert
a general problem (that I mentioned some time ago) into a personal problem?
I'm not making it personal. I don't see how you read that into what
Kyle McDonald writes:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
A big question still remains: what is GNU software and should non-gnu
software go to /usr/gnu?
That (If I recall correctly) was one of the questions raised on the
conference call and email thread. I was never clear why that was a good
James Carlson wrote:
Kyle McDonald writes:
I don't know the answers to all therse questions. I beleive they are
answerable, but I know Sun had a timetable, and probably didn't want to
hold up that one ARC case to hashing out this bigger problem.
Untrue. We held that exact
If you want to rename compare you will need to take
this up with
the ImageMagick folks.
That is not the approach that was taken when GNU tar was integrated as `gtar`,
was it?
And whoever integrated it didn't get the developers/maintainers of GNU tar to
rename him (the GNU tape archiver),
UNIX admin writes:
If you want to rename compare you will need to take
this up with
the ImageMagick folks.
That is not the approach that was taken when GNU tar was integrated as
`gtar`, was it?
No, because 'gtar' is a well-known disambiguator (even the GNU tar
sources search for tar as
James Carlson wrote:
UNIX admin writes:
If you want to rename compare you will need to take
this up with
the ImageMagick folks.
That is not the approach that was taken when GNU tar was integrated as
`gtar`, was it?
No, because 'gtar' is a well-known disambiguator (even
Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not to mention that when Gnu tar was integrated, Solaris already had a
'tar' in /usr/bin.
When 'compare' was integrated (by the first one to request it,) Solaris
had nothing in /usr/bin/ named 'compare'.
Could you please explain why some people
Joerg Schilling writes:
Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not to mention that when Gnu tar was integrated, Solaris already had a
'tar' in /usr/bin.
When 'compare' was integrated (by the first one to request it,) Solaris
had nothing in /usr/bin/ named 'compare'.
Could you
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not to mention that when Gnu tar was integrated, Solaris already had a
'tar' in /usr/bin.
When 'compare' was integrated (by the first one to request it,) Solaris
had nothing in /usr/bin/ named 'compare'.
Could you
On Dec 15, 2007 1:28 PM, W. Wayne Liauh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(It's a good feeling to know that the Solaris kernel has good genes.
Another smiley.)
Kernels don't have genes.
--
Chris Mahan
http://www.christophermahan.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cell 818.943.1850
solid (It's a good feeling to know
that the Solaris kernel has good genes. Another
smiley.)/blockquote
div /div
divKernels don't have genes./div/divbrbr
clear=allbr-- brChris Mahanbra
href=http://www.christophermahan.com/;http://www.chr
istophermahan.com//abra
href=mailto:[EMAIL
But kernels are written by human beings, they inevitably manifest many of the
traits of those who created them. . . I am sure there are a lot of resident
Star Trek die-hards who will do a much better job explaining. But a couple of
Sun's senior engineers have done a partial DNA sequencing on
Joseph Kowalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion:
If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used
in /usr/bin.
Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions.
Jörg
Garrett's Dad is obviously a very smart man. And
Garrett seems to
have learned from his Dad very well. He (Garrett) is
a very
successful contributor to ON and a (successful) role
model that we
would do well to emulate.
Regards,
Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX.
[EMAIL
It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious
Let me quote something I did write Fri, 29 Jun 2007 11:30:43:
Well, even in the OSS world besides OpenSolaris there is a lot of thigs that
could be done better ;-)
Unfortunately, there are OSS authors that do not care about
It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious
Why would you conclude that?
It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
If you want to rename compare you will need to take this up with
the ImageMagick folks.
I thinkt hat integrating open source projects as is is vastly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious
Why would you conclude that?
It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name
is thus illegal.
Says who? And who keeps
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious
Why would you conclude that?
It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name
is thus illegal.
If you want to rename
Ghee Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is just another chance to verify that there is collaboration on
OpenSolaris
and not just ignorant domination from Sun.
Let not argue your case by calling us ignorant! The point is
imagemagik is integrated.
It is not against any ARC rule
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name
is thus illegal.
Says who? And who keeps the record or registry?
Do you like to ignore
Joerg Schilling wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under
for which the product is ARC'ed.
Your compare is NOT part of that product; nor is there even an ARC
case proposing it.
Your compare does not exist in the context
Collaboration happens in the community.
If you are a member of the OpenSolaris community, you should try
to collaborate.
This is a case to see whether there is collaboration or domination!
No. You seem to operate under the misapprehension that collaboration
implies that you get your way.
Joerg Schilling wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick
name
is thus illegal.
Says who? And who keeps the record or registry?
Do you like to
Joerg Schilling wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under
for which the product is ARC'ed.
Your compare is NOT part of that product; nor is there even an ARC
case proposing it.
Your compare does not exist in the context
You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion:
If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used
in /usr/bin.
Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions.
PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under
for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick
name
is thus illegal.
Says who? And who keeps the record or registry?
Do you like to ignore that my compare is genric and thus
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under
for which the product is ARC'ed.
Your compare is NOT part of that product; nor is there even an ARC
case proposing it.
Your compare does not exist in the context of the product Solaris.
It
On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name appeared
in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express.
I completely fail to see how your side comment on a PSARC case discussing
netcat (PSARC 2007/389)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Collaboration happens in the community.
If you are a member of the OpenSolaris community, you should try
to collaborate.
This is a case to see whether there is collaboration or domination!
No. You seem to operate under the misapprehension that collaboration
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you like to ignore that my compare is genric and thus correctly using
the name and that it is 20 years older than imagemagick?
compare as a word dates back to probably 1000BC when the latin language
developed. Its use in english is post-norman, though, being
Ghee Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Collaboration also needs to happen in reasonable context.
It seems your argument is that your compare exist before hand,
therefore it
can not be used. This is more like a trademark game. The OpenSolaris
community can not afford to search every
Joep Vesseur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name
appeared
in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express.
I completely fail to see how your side comment on a
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:55:52PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Joep Vesseur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name
appeared
in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in
For this reason, the compare from imagemagick either needs to be renamed
or it needs to be put into a different directory.
Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command;
why don't you rename yours?
Since there is already a plain file compare program cmp which is
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When it comes to generic names (which unfortunately ImageMagick is full
of) I personally would prefer that it wasn't allowed unless they were
really generic. However UNIX is full of stuff like this already
cancel,accept
Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
name is a conflict with another existing one.
I recommend that Jörg make a proposal for such a change without making
such a proposal specific to his
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When it comes to generic names (which unfortunately ImageMagick is full
of) I personally would prefer that it wasn't allowed unless they were
really generic. However UNIX is full of stuff like this already
cancel,accept etc. It is very important
On Dec 14, 2007 7:44 PM, Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure that we can come up with such a method that will: a) allow
OpenSolaris to evolve and grow, while b) preventing any conflicts with
Linux distros (and *BSDs) that are also growing and evolving at
different rates.
Joerg Schilling wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For this reason, the compare from imagemagick either needs to be renamed
or it needs to be put into a different directory.
Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command;
why don't you rename yours?
Looks like
I'd set Reply-To so your replies, if any, would go to opensolaris-discuss,
not psarc-ext. One more try. Again, don't reply to me directly please.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:42:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why are we still arguing about this
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Norm Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your argument there is with the open source community. It's the
ImageMagick open source project that chose the name compare for their
program. Yes, we did choose to place it in /usr/bin along with the rest
of the
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:55:52PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Joep Vesseur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name
appeared
in /usr/bin.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For this reason, the compare from imagemagick either needs to be renamed
or it needs to be put into a different directory.
Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command;
why don't you rename yours?
Looks like you are unwilling to
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd set Reply-To so your replies, if any, would go to opensolaris-discuss,
not psarc-ext. One more try. Again, don't reply to me directly please.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:42:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When it comes to generic names (which unfortunately ImageMagick is full
of) I personally would prefer that it wasn't allowed unless they were
really generic. However UNIX is
Norm Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your argument there is with the open source community. It's the
ImageMagick open source project that chose the name compare for their
program. Yes, we did choose to place it in /usr/bin along with the rest
of the ImageMagick commands, but there was a
Actually, we have a cooperative process for dealing with this kind of
thing. It's call ARCing.
Joerg Schilling wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For this reason, the compare from imagemagick either needs to be renamed
or it needs to be put into a different directory.
Your
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
name is a conflict with another existing one.
I recommend that Jörg make a proposal for such a change
As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris,
OpenSolaris cannot evolve.
ARC does not decide as much as approves, approves w/ TCRs or denies.
But projects approved by the ARC are often implemented so to claim
that that is impossible is ludicrous.
But they are
Joerg Schilling wrote:
As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris,
OpenSolaris cannot evolve.
It is clearly possible to implement ARC decisions in OpenSolaris - there
are hundreds if not thousands of examples of this happening already.
There are difficulties in
Joerg:
You've been told how to prevent new conflicts with your tools arising:
run one or more ARC cases for integrating your tools into OpenSolaris,
As long as it has not been verified that arc cases help, I will definitely not
do this!
You are responsible to allow approved arc cases to
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
name is a conflict with another existing one.
I recommend that Jörg make a
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 12:10:25PM -0800, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
name is a
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 08:35:33PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris,
OpenSolaris cannot evolve.
You've jumped the shark.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
My experience has been that ARC is very agreeable to work with people to
figure out new ways of doing things when needed. It took us several
failed attempts, but working together we found a way to document
interface change in the GNOME desktop that is suitable to ARC and
which also isn't so
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
As my dad always said, Actions speak louder than words. Demonstrate
your commitment to getting star integrated by your deed rather than your
e-mails.
+1 for your Dad's community project!G
--
Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group
Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
As my dad always said, Actions speak louder than words. Demonstrate
your commitment to getting star integrated by your deed rather than your
e-mails.
+1 for your Dad's community project!G
I am sorry that
Joerg Schilling wrote:
You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion:
If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used
in /usr/bin.
Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions.
Jörg
Seriously: Could you cite the precedent for
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
name is a conflict with another existing
65 matches
Mail list logo
