On 28/10/2007, Stefan Teleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/28/07, Mike Kupfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>>>> "Stefan" == Stefan Teleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Stefan> This is what you do when a Sun engineer tells you that there is > > Stefan> a Studio option which would allow you to compile some GNU ju-ju, > > Stefan> but, because the option is undocumented, they cannot disclose it > > Stefan> to you: you figure it out. > > > > Actually, if I were an external contributor and got told that, I'd > > probably go find something else to work on. > > Precisely, considering the fact that GNU sed is available for download > as binary from > many sites (sunfreeware, blastwave, etc), and can also be found on the > Companion > CD, and that i have directly expressed the exact same reservations as > to the usefulness > of spending time on building GNU sed with Studio, when the real > project at hand is > OpenAL bindings for libquicktime.
Which is an unrelated topic as the wonderful thing about not being a Sun employee is the right to choose what we work on since it's *our* time, effort, energy, systems, etc. I happe to care about solving and understanding why I can't build GNU sed with Sun Studio because one of the most common complaints I hear from fellow developers is that building open source software on Solaris is a pain and I would prefer to understand how to do it myself and then disseminate that knowledge to others to spare them the same pain I went through. It is my right to work on any part of the "stack" that I feel is necessary to reach my goals. The only reason I feel rather vindictive is because I felt thwarted along the way by the utter ridiculousness of Sun's current policies regarding the usage of a tool that an *Open* community so heavily relies on. The point of this thread was two things: 1) This is the *Open*Solaris project, and the Sun Studio tools are relied upon by its contributors; that implies a certain level of responsibility on the part of Sun that not yet been met. 2) Two years ago, Jonathan Schwartz promised that everything sun does will be open source. I can reasonably understand why Sun Studio isn't; though I find it unacceptable that not even a timeline has been given over two years later. Since we don't have the source yet, which would have allowed me to discover and understand any relevant compiler flags on my own, I expect at the very least to have *open* communication about Sun Studio and its related tools with any member of the *Open*Solaris community since we rely so heavily on them. It is unacceptable that Sun is still treating a tool that the *Open*Solaris community relies on like a state secrets project. You can paint this however you like; but the reality is that the entire process was a failure for me due to Sun's own failures: 1) Failure to openly communicate about a tool they expect the *Open*Solaris community to rely on. 2) Failure to provide open documentation or source code as promised over two years ago. The blame here rests solely on Sun's shoulders. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. " --Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ tools-discuss mailing list [email protected]
