Subject: RE: autoconf(9) tree in an odd hardware arrangement
To: Michael Lorenz <macallan@NetBSD.org>
From: De Zeurkous <email@example.com>
Date: 11/24/2007 02:27:05
On Sat, November 24, 2007 02:05, Michael Lorenz wrote:
>[snip PGP crap -- use RFC822 headers for that]
> On Nov 23, 2007, at 20:04, De Zeurkous wrote:
>> Of course, the chance of having something progressive as this taken
>> seriously by the NetBSD term is probably near-zero. I'm willing to be
>> proven wrong, but realistically this is not going to happen.
> You're welcome to actually /write/ that code.
Just because I know the Right Thing to do, I need to implement it by
myself? Of course, you don't have an ethical obligation to do the Right
Thing or nothing at all, instead of scoring brownie points from the
'community' at the expense of the quality of your work, have you?
It may take ages for me to finish my work -- which is not entirely my
fault, as I argued in the preceding paragraph --, but at least I do the
Right Thing. It also means that I'm up to my ears in work already (the two
relevant scenes in TNG 'Pen Pals' spring to mind) and expect something
more of others than to adhere to the -dogma- cliche of 'zomfgwtfbbq, it's
your idea, you implement it while we sit back with potato chips and
P.S.: Please don't make me spread this to netbsd-lusers again :/
> have fun
>[snip PGP crap -- use RFC822 headers for that or attach it]
% NetBSD, zsh, twm, nvi and roff junkie
From the fool file:
I don't see why the way people have historically partitioned disks should
dictate which kernels we build and distribute by default in the future.
--Darren Reed (darrenr@NetBSD.org), NetBSD tech-kern