Port-alpha archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Regarding the ULTRIX and OSF1 compats

On March 16, 2019 5:02:46 PM Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost> wrote:
> Le 16/03/2019 à 17:44, Dave McGuire a écrit :
>> On 3/16/19 11:04 AM, Maxime Villard wrote:
>>>> I think that what Robert, and others (including me) argument is
>>>> actually that things should not be removed, and the reason would be
>>>> that this is the core mission, purpose, reason (or whatever you want
>>>> to call it) for NetBSDs existence. Instead it should be fixed, because
>>>> that is what it all is about. Make it work - don't remove it.
>>> It seems our disagreement comes down to that, indeed. It seems to me
>>> this has
>>> already been answered to, too, in previous discussions.
>> Sigh.  So I see you're at it again.
>> You are obviously quite obsessed with chopping out functionality that
>> you have unilaterally decided is not worth having in NetBSD anymore.
> Could you possibly be more dishonest than this? Impressive. Keep up the good
> work.

  We've had this conversation before.

>> Just who the hell do you think you are, anyway, and why are you so
>> obsessed with trashing everything that existed before you graced us with
>> your presence?
> I am one of the very few people that have continuously and extensively worked
> on the NetBSD kernel over the last five years, to bring stability, performance
> and security improvements in all of the system. I've redesigned a good part of
> our x86 port, I've developed all the complex fixes for the speculation bugs,
> I've worked on securing our network stack, our syscalls, our allocators, I've
> developed comprehensive hypervisor support, the strongest KASLR existing to
> date, and apart from that, I've developed numerous bug detection systems that
> have fixed several hundreds of bugs in NetBSD, among many other miscellaneous
> things I've done in and for NetBSD.

  We'll thanks for that. (seriously, thank you)  But you obviously think this gives you the right to redefine what this project has always been about, at its core.  Do you even remember "Of course it runs NETBSD"?  Do you even care?

> And you, who are you exactly?  You sound like a clueless fatass.

  Oh, I assure you, I AM quite the fatass.  I can send photos!  If you'd like to label me as clueless because I voice opposition to your personal agenda, that's your prerogative, but personally I think that's a bit of a leap, and would question your logic.

  But who I am is a long-time user and supporter of this OS.  I have deployed thousands (many thousands) of NetBSD systems in commercial environments.  And I have used and depended upon the functionality that you seek to remove.

  Are you one of those developers who considers users and their opinions to be nothing more than inconveniences that get in the way of what you want to do?  Because that's sure what you sound like.

>> If you have such a problem with the COMPAT_* layers, go fix them.  I
>> realize that would be more work, and it'd be easier to just trash them,
>> but that's not what NetBSD is about, and your attitude about this is
>> most unwelcome, coming from this NetBSD user since v0.9.
>> You need a serious adjustment of perspective.  As others have
>> suggested, please go read about what NetBSD is, its clearly-stated
>> mission, and its spirit.
> As I said, keep up the good work. Anyway you've just lost what was left
> of your credibility, your mails go directly to the trash from now on.

  I'll try to contain my sorrow.


Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index