More than that, where are the requirements to be 18 to purchase a mouse? (Maybe I shouldn't say that, I'm sure that'll be next. I mean, who'd have thought you wouldn't be able to buy fluids for your car if you were under 18.)
(F) whether the offense involved a computer used by the government in furtherance of national defense, national security, or the administration of justice;
(G) whether the violation was intended to or had the effect of significantly interfering with or disrupting a critical infrastructure; and
Good thing we didn't have this law in place when Robert Morris had his accident.
Nothing spreads panic and fear like a little knowledge.
Sheesh. What is with some of you people? This is a theme I keep seeing in this thread and it blows my mind.
Serious question for all of you "protect us from ourselves" people. How old are you? 15? 16? older than 18? If the last, do you still live with your mommy and daddy? Do you still call them that? If you're living on your own, how long did you live with them? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm honestly curious. I have this deep suspicion that too much time under a protective wing produces people with these sorts of viewpoints.
I will never understand this weird desire some people have to be protected from themselves. Yes, there are stupid people. Who cares. If I, as an adult, wish to self-diagnose and self-treat then the consequences are mine to bear. The responsibility to properly research is mine. Just like anything else.
If your car starts acting up, and you use some database to figure out what it is, and maybe even go to your local parts store and buy the parts and attempt to fix it yourself, is that radical? It's your car. If you break it trying to diagnose/fix it yourself then it's your problem. Same thing goes here.
Personally, I haven't been to a doctor (for myself) for nine years. And I hadn't been for awhile before that. I only went then to get my physical and blood workup to get my marriage license. (Don't get me started on that). Oh, and I went to the emergency room once since then, to get stiched up from a nasty cut on my leg.
Most problems we face can be fixed without any perscription medicine. People are just too damn quick to go to the doctor. While they don't think so now, I think the doctors would even like it better if people just took better care of themselves, and handled their minor issues themselves. Kind of like us really preferring if users would educate themselves enough to fix minor issues (like unplugging the network cable) themselves. Leaves more time for serious issues.
So, you want him to fill the whole front page with his commentary? The things that are/wrong/ are relatively obvious to people who know linux well.
Since I can already here the "oh yeah!? like what?" coming, I'll give a couple examples from skimming.
lack of a standard way to add fonts
Needing drivers for each minor kernel revision
badmouthing support people for using RTFM
Ok, so that last is partly opinion, but I think it's wrong too. I don't know where people get the idea that linux is for everyone, but it's not. Nor do I think it should be. The day it is, is the day I find a different OS to use.
No, everyone doesn't want to compile their own applications. No, not everyone wants to be able to manipulate everything in an OS. Some people weren't meant to have that kind of power and flexibility.
In the same way, not everyone wants to meticulously maintain and tweak their cars. Most people just buy a newer car, and take it to have its oil changed, and for dealer service checks and tuneups. Others do that themselves. Still others buy older cars specificially so they can do more teaking and customizing than newer cars allow.
Operating systems are not one size fits all, nor should they be. There are different types of users. If you are like this guy in the article, and you want something that doesn't ask you to know the system inside and out, and that doesn't require any real effort or thought to work with, and the limitations of a system like that are not burdensome to you then go with MacOS X or with some Windows OS.
But don't try and tell me that my preferred OS, which I prefer just the way it is should be made to work more like these user-proof oses. If I wanted an OS like that, I'd RUN an os like that.
What a crock. You can't unilaterally define which operating systems are productive and which are not. No, maybe linux is not for you. But I can guarantee you there's no freaking way Mac (even OS-X) is more productive for me than linux is. In fact, I find windows 2k more usable than the mac interface, at least with the single-button mouse. (I haven't had a chance to play with it with a multi-button mouse) For my wife, OS-X is probably a good choice, along with a large number of general user-class people out there.
There are probably even some people, though continuous use, for whom windows is the most productive interface. I find this hard to imagine, but it's possible. Just find the OS that works well for you and what you do and stick with it. Quit trying to get every other OS to change to work the way you personally are most productive. If you like Mac, then use it and quit whining about the way other OSes work.
The couldn't be charged for the actual crime committed, but for fostering an environment in which it was easy to perpetrate such a crime.
Could be, maybe. Should be, no. Not unless we can start suing the city for making alleys where people can so easily be mugged.
Just because LE can't figure out who didn't, doesn't mean they get to just pick someone and charge them instead. And it is not incumbent upon us as citizens to log and track everything to make their job easier. It's in our best interests, but it isn't (or shouldn't be) mandatory.
Now, if someone does instigate some sort of illegal activity using one of these public access points, I believe that the user who is providing the public access point would be liable, not the cable company. Some would argue this point. They believe that they should be able to host a public access point, and have the cable company be liable for any damages caused...that's completely unjust. If you want to provide such a service, you have to take responsibility for it.
Here's a novel concept. How about if the perpetrator takes responsibility for his actions?
I say definately. I love linux, and I use it for just about everything I do. But that doesn't help say, my parents, or friends I know who are looking for something which requires less of them.
With MS basically looking to try and force people into XP, I've been wondering what I'm going to recommend to these people. OS-X is a definate possibility, but apple hardware is rather expensive. And I'm not exactly a huge fan of the way apple handles things either. They are not exactly a model company either.
Honestly, I've never gotten a chance to use BeOS. I really wanted to give it a whirl, but it went under before I got a chance. From what I saw though, I think it might fit into that space very well, if they can get enough apps. (Binary support for other free OS's would be good there. Not sure how feasible that is though in this case.)
Regardless, they aren't a company. They have no need to prove market or profitability. If they want to do it, that's all that really matters. There's no need to justify your itch before you can scratch it.
State-sponsored pledges of allegiance are propagandistic
All this really cracks me up. I see people on this site and elsewhere going on and on about indoctrination and propaganda over a few minutes of recitation each morning before school. Something that doesn't even happen in every public school to boot.
Meanwhile, people are sending their kids to these schools every day for at least TWELVE YEARS where they'll be subjected to government propaganda for HOURS AT A TIME in the form of "history" and "political science" courses.
I believe the famous phrase for this is "strain out a camel, but swallow a gnat".
In theory, the modern Republican party espouses the same line.
Shyeah. And in theory, so do the democrats when they want to get elected. Republicans tend to fall close (at least in theory) on the economic side, but on the social side they hit wide of the mark.
Republicanism took forty years to get anywhere (longer, if you count the rise of abolitionism as the beginning of Republican philosophy), and it took a Civil War to get them established as a permanent political force
Heh. The republican party of that day is the democrat party of today, and the republican party of today were democrats then. The two parties switched roles almost overnight sometime after reconstruction. Sadly, I can't remember the date, (I blame it on it being too early in the morning).
It isn't just about who's talented, and who deserves to be played. It's about a shakedown, and that's just unacceptable, Mr. President, for the industry, for the artist, and for all of us as who listen."
So, don't go. Don't listen to those stations. -shrug- You, as the consumer, make choices that affect that business.
If you weren't willing to pay that much to go to a concert, they wouldn't be charging that much. If nobody goes, they won't make any money. But, they know that people love to whine about these things, but in reality, you'll keep listening to the station,and you'll keep buying tickets.
Considering your later name-calling one would think you'd take the time to get a clue before spouting off.
First, not everyone uses switches. And even when they do, it is largely only at the local and remote points. intermediate hops happen at ROUTERS. Regardless, it is not all that difficult to sniff on a switched network either. Switches are not impervious to network attacks. Do some research.
And for that matter, there is encrypted telnet.
Encrypted telnet doesn't even come close to providing the features ssh does. Encrypted telnet is better that straight telnet, but not by much.
This is what happened to Unix in the 70's and 80's, leading to Unix's fragmentation and irrelevance as a platform.
Ok...this is just wrong. Early unix was proprietary, not free software.
With GPL code, you don't have to worry so much about v2.0 coming out as closed-source, leaving you with a choice between staying with v1.0 or losing the benefits of open source.
This is not entirely correct. Granted, someone
can't just take GPL'd code and make a new proprietary version of it w/out the original author's permission, but it/can/ be done by the author, or it could happen through the author dual-licensing the product.
Example:
Author writes Software and licenses version 1.0 under the GPL. Six months later, he releases version 2 binary only, new proprietary license.
Or: he dual licenses it under BSD and GPL. Now it is subject to the same risks as BSD software.
Or: He licenses it under some custom license to a specific company in exchange for some compensation.
Obviously, using the GPL doesn't guarantee a free version 2.0. Just a free version 1.0, and the ABILITY to have a free 2.0 through someone else forking the code if nothing else. Guess what, a BSD 1.0 guarantees the same thing.
Re:A demonstration of how money corrupts the syste
on
Gentoo Linux 1.2
·
· Score: 2
Don't even bother if you can't boot from CD
Odd. I just installed on a box here a few days ago on a system that can't boot from a CD. It's only a 500mhz pentium machine. I just booted using grub and tftp and mounted the cd and went from there. Took me a couple days to build everything but it works great.
It's not like that stuff is going straight into honest cops' wallets, but it does make it easier for them to earn pay raises. After so many "money" fights at home, they're much more likely than us to convince themselves that busting people on drug offenses and confiscating all their property is a moral, or even honorable thing to do. Since the alternative is to remain on a fixed income while working at a job that puts them in constant physical danger, they probably don't want to examine the ethics of it too closely.
Unfortunately, it/is/ going straight into cops' wallets.:-( Pay raises take a long time, and higher-ups tend to look the other way. It's bad enough, that cops have actually raided other cops doing sting operations and walked off with the proceeds.
I'm not trying to disparage/all/ cops or anything, there certainly are honest cops out there, but the more power we grant to them the
fewer there are and the more those that/are/
honest get corrupted. (Power corrupts) The opportunities there are just too hard to resist.
I'd love the chance to pay $10 for a complete album. As long as it's in MP3 format at a decent bit-rate.
I agree wholeheartedly, except for the above point. I'd like to either have my choice of encodings. Both bitrate and format. So you'd have breakdowns more like:
128-bit mp3/ogg : $.50
196-bit mp3/ogg : $.99
320-bit mp3/ogg : $1.50
44.1 wav : $2.00
Or something along those lines. The price-points might not be right but it gets the idea across. For myself, I'd always buy the wav, and burn the wavs to a CD for archival, and then encode it in
my favorite format. That way, if a newer better format comes out a couple years from now I can re-encode from source instead of buying a new copy, assuming such a copy is even available.
I don't think the poster specifically meant to target RPMs, but included them simply as an example.
I appreciate what you are trying to do here. However, unfortunately, years of being on mailing lists has exposed me to this on too many occaisions for me to believe that is the case.
If the issue was package management and distribution in general then RPM would not have been singled out. It's popular and fashionable to rag on RPM and RedHat. I just get tired of hearing it.
Shyeah. Cause all those people doing binary installs with dpkg always check their packages.
I'm so tired off all this anti-rpm bullshit. The best you can hope for is to get your packages from a trusted source. Yes it is a good idea to check the md5 signatures, but seeing as how they are generally stored together with the packages it's quite likely they were changed too, so it doesn't give you much.
Signing/checking with public key signing is much much better.
The same exact problems plaque binary AND source tarballs. So singling out a single pkg format is just ridiculous.
I don't think it has anything to do with Linus being "a prick". He just is of the opinion that it can and should be merged in pieces. However, that isn't reasonable given the kind of changes being done. At least in the opinion of many of us. There's a division of thought there.
To my mind, the whole point of an email campaign is to try and persuede Linus that it/can't/ be done in pieces, and needs to be done in one piece.
For more info on this see the link from the story with Keith's FAQ.
In addition, Keith has gone the extra mile in making sure that both build systems can co-exist. So it isn't even an issue of going all or nothing.
Advising against insulting Linus' technical judgement
I have yet to see how or where I insulted Linus' technical judgement.
By the way, this very issue has cropped up before, with largely the same results. For quite some time PowerPC Linux couldn't get merged into the main tree, because the people who were maintaining linux-ppc kept trying to submit massive "patches" to get the whole tree in at once. And Linus told them what he's telling Keith now. And they went and sulked in their sandbox awhile longer, and finally it all worked out. (But they at least didn't try to force Linus' hand with a mass-mailing campaign.)
That is not exactly the same, and Linus/has/ done flag-day merges in the past before. He just doesn't want to do this one. Obviously, in some way, those other projects managed to persuede him it was necessary and all I would like to see is the same.
Nobody is trying to "force" Linus' hand. As if that were even possible. As the maintainer he pretty much decides it one way or the other. True, someone could fork the kernel, but that seems HIGHLY unlikely, and more than a little silly in this case.
Instead,/I/ believe the point of this email campaign and I/know/ the point of this post was to try and demonstrate support for the new build system getting merged in, and to provide a forum for people to voice their thoughts on how and why it should be merged.
Instead, I see people would rather just go entirely based on what was in my post, and not read any of the many threads and posts I linked to to inform themselves about what is going on.
I put aside my cynicism to post this, hoping that by posting it in the developers forum I'd get a group capable of discussing the real issues rather than feeling some absurd need to defend Linus from a perceived (but nonexistant) slight.
Make Linus do what you want by impugning his technical judgment,
So has Linus now been elevated to a point where his thoughts, opinions, and judgement are beyond question? Sorry, I didn't get the memo on that one.
calling him a liar,
I didn't call him a liar. I suggested that it seemed like there had to be more to it than what he chose to share. Granted, you could call that a lie by omission if you want, but I don't think it applies in this case. He gave the reasons he wanted to give, and none of them are a lie (though I don't think they are correct) I just have a feeling he has other reasons he isn't mentioning for some reason. That doesn't make him a liar.
and asking people to flood his mailbox with complaints.
Nobody is asking anyone to flood his mailbox with complaints. What Keith is asking for is kernel developers who like what they see, and want to see kbuild 2.5 go into the kernel, to tell Linus that. The idea is for him to see the amount of support that it has and convince him to swing the other way, not to beat him into submission.
Ya, nothing is going to get Linus to act on this like a bunch of laymen spamming his e-mail box.
The call for an email campaign was for developers. Not for slashdot. I hesitated to even mention it, but the Q&A in that post was a good resource for keith's opinions on the matter.
You know what the real reason Linus hasn't merged it yet? He is too fucking busy. The best thing to do is to be patient, and keep reminding him - POLITELY!
No, I don't buy that. I don't think even Linus would agree with you on that. (I can't speak for him, but I think his words speak for themselves) Keith/has/ been patient. He's been waiting to merge this since the beginning of the 2.5 tree iirc.
Reminding him isn't going to change his opinion that the code should go in in little pieces regardless of the difficulties of this or how realistic it might be.
I agree with him that it's good to move in small patches generally. But there are times when that really doesn't make sense, and I think this is one of those times, and I think I'm in fairly good company.
Is it a good idea for slashdot to be a soapbox for asking linus to merge in feature x? You ouldn't want him to get slashdotted:)
Yeah, I wrestled with this actually. I had the same concern. In the end, I really wanted to see this get broader coverage than it would get just on the lkml. I did what I could within the post to try and make people/think/ before emailing him. My hope is that we'll get some decent discussion here in the developers area of thoughts and opinions that might help to sway him. (Assuming he even bothers to read it.)
Hopefully, it won't backfire and cause a deluge of email to him from a bunch of 10-year-olds who can't even spell kernel.
As for Qwests 'loss of revenue', they actually gained revenue because my neighbor wasn't really sure if they would get DSL or not, but because I asked them to get it so we could share it, they signed up. So really Qwest gained in this situation, because they got one more customer that they wouldn't have otherwise.
Unfortunately, companies like qwest/sbc/etc are way too braindead to consider these things. So it wouldn't matter one whit to them.
Slashdot Mirror
More than that, where are the requirements to be 18 to purchase a mouse? (Maybe I shouldn't say that, I'm sure that'll be next. I mean, who'd have thought you wouldn't be able to buy fluids for your car if you were under 18.)
Good thing we didn't have this law in place when Robert Morris had his accident.
Sheesh. What is with some of you people? This is a theme I keep seeing in this thread and it blows my mind.
Serious question for all of you "protect us from ourselves" people. How old are you? 15? 16? older than 18? If the last, do you still live with your mommy and daddy? Do you still call them that? If you're living on your own, how long did you live with them? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm honestly curious. I have this deep suspicion that too much time under a protective wing produces people with these sorts of viewpoints.
I will never understand this weird desire some people have to be protected from themselves. Yes, there are stupid people. Who cares. If I, as an adult, wish to self-diagnose and self-treat then the consequences are mine to bear. The responsibility to properly research is mine. Just like anything else.
If your car starts acting up, and you use some database to figure out what it is, and maybe even go to your local parts store and buy the parts and attempt to fix it yourself, is that radical? It's your car. If you break it trying to diagnose/fix it yourself then it's your problem. Same thing goes here.
Personally, I haven't been to a doctor (for myself) for nine years. And I hadn't been for awhile before that. I only went then to get my physical and blood workup to get my marriage license. (Don't get me started on that). Oh, and I went to the emergency room once since then, to get stiched up from a nasty cut on my leg.
Most problems we face can be fixed without any perscription medicine. People are just too damn quick to go to the doctor. While they don't think so now, I think the doctors would even like it better if people just took better care of themselves, and handled their minor issues themselves. Kind of like us really preferring if users would educate themselves enough to fix minor issues (like unplugging the network cable) themselves. Leaves more time for serious issues.
Since I can already here the "oh yeah!? like what?" coming, I'll give a couple examples from skimming.
Ok, so that last is partly opinion, but I think it's wrong too. I don't know where people get the idea that linux is for everyone, but it's not. Nor do I think it should be. The day it is, is the day I find a different OS to use.
No, everyone doesn't want to compile their own applications. No, not everyone wants to be able to manipulate everything in an OS. Some people weren't meant to have that kind of power and flexibility.
In the same way, not everyone wants to meticulously maintain and tweak their cars. Most people just buy a newer car, and take it to have its oil changed, and for dealer service checks and tuneups. Others do that themselves. Still others buy older cars specificially so they can do more teaking and customizing than newer cars allow.
Operating systems are not one size fits all, nor should they be. There are different types of users. If you are like this guy in the article, and you want something that doesn't ask you to know the system inside and out, and that doesn't require any real effort or thought to work with, and the limitations of a system like that are not burdensome to you then go with MacOS X or with some Windows OS.
But don't try and tell me that my preferred OS, which I prefer just the way it is should be made to work more like these user-proof oses. If I wanted an OS like that, I'd RUN an os like that.
What a crock. You can't unilaterally define which operating systems are productive and which are not. No, maybe linux is not for you. But I can guarantee you there's no freaking way Mac (even OS-X) is more productive for me than linux is. In fact, I find windows 2k more usable than the mac interface, at least with the single-button mouse. (I haven't had a chance to play with it with a multi-button mouse) For my wife, OS-X is probably a good choice, along with a large number of general user-class people out there. There are probably even some people, though continuous use, for whom windows is the most productive interface. I find this hard to imagine, but it's possible. Just find the OS that works well for you and what you do and stick with it. Quit trying to get every other OS to change to work the way you personally are most productive. If you like Mac, then use it and quit whining about the way other OSes work.
Could be, maybe. Should be, no. Not unless we can start suing the city for making alleys where people can so easily be mugged.
Just because LE can't figure out who didn't, doesn't mean they get to just pick someone and charge them instead. And it is not incumbent upon us as citizens to log and track everything to make their job easier. It's in our best interests, but it isn't (or shouldn't be) mandatory.
Here's a novel concept. How about if the perpetrator takes responsibility for his actions?
With MS basically looking to try and force people into XP, I've been wondering what I'm going to recommend to these people. OS-X is a definate possibility, but apple hardware is rather expensive. And I'm not exactly a huge fan of the way apple handles things either. They are not exactly a model company either.
Honestly, I've never gotten a chance to use BeOS. I really wanted to give it a whirl, but it went under before I got a chance. From what I saw though, I think it might fit into that space very well, if they can get enough apps. (Binary support for other free OS's would be good there. Not sure how feasible that is though in this case.)
Regardless, they aren't a company. They have no need to prove market or profitability. If they want to do it, that's all that really matters. There's no need to justify your itch before you can scratch it.
All this really cracks me up. I see people on this site and elsewhere going on and on about indoctrination and propaganda over a few minutes of recitation each morning before school. Something that doesn't even happen in every public school to boot.
Meanwhile, people are sending their kids to these schools every day for at least TWELVE YEARS where they'll be subjected to government propaganda for HOURS AT A TIME in the form of "history" and "political science" courses.
I believe the famous phrase for this is "strain out a camel, but swallow a gnat".
Shyeah. And in theory, so do the democrats when they want to get elected. Republicans tend to fall close (at least in theory) on the economic side, but on the social side they hit wide of the mark.
Republicanism took forty years to get anywhere (longer, if you count the rise of abolitionism as the beginning of Republican philosophy), and it took a Civil War to get them established as a permanent political force
Heh. The republican party of that day is the democrat party of today, and the republican party of today were democrats then. The two parties switched roles almost overnight sometime after reconstruction. Sadly, I can't remember the date, (I blame it on it being too early in the morning).
So, don't go. Don't listen to those stations. -shrug- You, as the consumer, make choices that affect that business.
If you weren't willing to pay that much to go to a concert, they wouldn't be charging that much. If nobody goes, they won't make any money. But, they know that people love to whine about these things, but in reality, you'll keep listening to the station,and you'll keep buying tickets.
Considering your later name-calling one would think you'd take the time to get a clue before spouting off.
First, not everyone uses switches. And even when they do, it is largely only at the local and remote points. intermediate hops happen at ROUTERS. Regardless, it is not all that difficult to sniff on a switched network either. Switches are not impervious to network attacks. Do some research.
And for that matter, there is encrypted telnet.
Encrypted telnet doesn't even come close to providing the features ssh does. Encrypted telnet is better that straight telnet, but not by much.
Ok...this is just wrong. Early unix was proprietary, not free software.
With GPL code, you don't have to worry so much about v2.0 coming out as closed-source, leaving you with a choice between staying with v1.0 or losing the benefits of open source.
This is not entirely correct. Granted, someone can't just take GPL'd code and make a new proprietary version of it w/out the original author's permission, but it /can/ be done by the author, or it could happen through the author dual-licensing the product.
Example: Author writes Software and licenses version 1.0 under the GPL. Six months later, he releases version 2 binary only, new proprietary license.
Or: he dual licenses it under BSD and GPL. Now it is subject to the same risks as BSD software.
Or: He licenses it under some custom license to a specific company in exchange for some compensation.
Obviously, using the GPL doesn't guarantee a free version 2.0. Just a free version 1.0, and the ABILITY to have a free 2.0 through someone else forking the code if nothing else. Guess what, a BSD 1.0 guarantees the same thing.
Odd. I just installed on a box here a few days ago on a system that can't boot from a CD. It's only a 500mhz pentium machine. I just booted using grub and tftp and mounted the cd and went from there. Took me a couple days to build everything but it works great.
Unfortunately, it /is/ going straight into cops' wallets. :-( Pay raises take a long time, and higher-ups tend to look the other way. It's bad enough, that cops have actually raided other cops doing sting operations and walked off with the proceeds.
I'm not trying to disparage /all/ cops or anything, there certainly are honest cops out there, but the more power we grant to them the
fewer there are and the more those that /are/
honest get corrupted. (Power corrupts) The opportunities there are just too hard to resist.
I agree wholeheartedly, except for the above point. I'd like to either have my choice of encodings. Both bitrate and format. So you'd have breakdowns more like:
Or something along those lines. The price-points might not be right but it gets the idea across. For myself, I'd always buy the wav, and burn the wavs to a CD for archival, and then encode it in my favorite format. That way, if a newer better format comes out a couple years from now I can re-encode from source instead of buying a new copy, assuming such a copy is even available.
I appreciate what you are trying to do here. However, unfortunately, years of being on mailing lists has exposed me to this on too many occaisions for me to believe that is the case.
If the issue was package management and distribution in general then RPM would not have been singled out. It's popular and fashionable to rag on RPM and RedHat. I just get tired of hearing it.
I'm so tired off all this anti-rpm bullshit. The best you can hope for is to get your packages from a trusted source. Yes it is a good idea to check the md5 signatures, but seeing as how they are generally stored together with the packages it's quite likely they were changed too, so it doesn't give you much.
Signing/checking with public key signing is much much better.
The same exact problems plaque binary AND source tarballs. So singling out a single pkg format is just ridiculous.
To my mind, the whole point of an email campaign is to try and persuede Linus that it /can't/ be done in pieces, and needs to be done in one piece.
For more info on this see the link from the story with Keith's FAQ.
In addition, Keith has gone the extra mile in making sure that both build systems can co-exist. So it isn't even an issue of going all or nothing.
I have yet to see how or where I insulted Linus' technical judgement.
By the way, this very issue has cropped up before, with largely the same results. For quite some time PowerPC Linux couldn't get merged into the main tree, because the people who were maintaining linux-ppc kept trying to submit massive "patches" to get the whole tree in at once. And Linus told them what he's telling Keith now. And they went and sulked in their sandbox awhile longer, and finally it all worked out. (But they at least didn't try to force Linus' hand with a mass-mailing campaign.)
That is not exactly the same, and Linus /has/ done flag-day merges in the past before. He just doesn't want to do this one. Obviously, in some way, those other projects managed to persuede him it was necessary and all I would like to see is the same.
Nobody is trying to "force" Linus' hand. As if that were even possible. As the maintainer he pretty much decides it one way or the other. True, someone could fork the kernel, but that seems HIGHLY unlikely, and more than a little silly in this case.
Instead, /I/ believe the point of this email campaign and I /know/ the point of this post was to try and demonstrate support for the new build system getting merged in, and to provide a forum for people to voice their thoughts on how and why it should be merged.
Instead, I see people would rather just go entirely based on what was in my post, and not read any of the many threads and posts I linked to to inform themselves about what is going on.
I put aside my cynicism to post this, hoping that by posting it in the developers forum I'd get a group capable of discussing the real issues rather than feeling some absurd need to defend Linus from a perceived (but nonexistant) slight.
So has Linus now been elevated to a point where his thoughts, opinions, and judgement are beyond question? Sorry, I didn't get the memo on that one.
calling him a liar,
I didn't call him a liar. I suggested that it seemed like there had to be more to it than what he chose to share. Granted, you could call that a lie by omission if you want, but I don't think it applies in this case. He gave the reasons he wanted to give, and none of them are a lie (though I don't think they are correct) I just have a feeling he has other reasons he isn't mentioning for some reason. That doesn't make him a liar.
and asking people to flood his mailbox with complaints.
Nobody is asking anyone to flood his mailbox with complaints. What Keith is asking for is kernel developers who like what they see, and want to see kbuild 2.5 go into the kernel, to tell Linus that. The idea is for him to see the amount of support that it has and convince him to swing the other way, not to beat him into submission.
The call for an email campaign was for developers. Not for slashdot. I hesitated to even mention it, but the Q&A in that post was a good resource for keith's opinions on the matter.
You know what the real reason Linus hasn't merged it yet? He is too fucking busy. The best thing to do is to be patient, and keep reminding him - POLITELY!
No, I don't buy that. I don't think even Linus would agree with you on that. (I can't speak for him, but I think his words speak for themselves) Keith /has/ been patient. He's been waiting to merge this since the beginning of the 2.5 tree iirc.
Reminding him isn't going to change his opinion that the code should go in in little pieces regardless of the difficulties of this or how realistic it might be.
I agree with him that it's good to move in small patches generally. But there are times when that really doesn't make sense, and I think this is one of those times, and I think I'm in fairly good company.
Yeah, I wrestled with this actually. I had the same concern. In the end, I really wanted to see this get broader coverage than it would get just on the lkml. I did what I could within the post to try and make people /think/ before emailing him. My hope is that we'll get some decent discussion here in the developers area of thoughts and opinions that might help to sway him. (Assuming he even bothers to read it.)
Hopefully, it won't backfire and cause a deluge of email to him from a bunch of 10-year-olds who can't even spell kernel.
Unfortunately, companies like qwest/sbc/etc are way too braindead to consider these things. So it wouldn't matter one whit to them.