Amazing, someone got under Mike's collar. I wonder who could bozo
well enough to manage that?
{O.O}
From: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris@redhat.com>
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, David Durst wrote:
>
> >> A full install does not install every single RPM package. There
> >> is a reason for that.
> >
> >Sounds like you are clueless for what I am asking.
> >And you never stated Binary ONLY modules, I believe you said
> >binary modules (Which really doesn't make sense but I read into it
> >to make it make sense)
>
> Don't mince words. Binary only modules are binary only modules.
> It is stupid to think that Red Hat would ship binary modules and
> not ship the source code, or that Red Hat would ship binary
> modules that someone else compiled if source was available.
>
> There was no lack of clarity in what I said.
So the bozo is unsure of the concept that Red Hat does not ship
software it cannot compile and repair of needed. Some bozo must have
an nvidia whazzitwonderfancyschmancyvideocard, eh? I can understand
his frustration. But nvidia will not release source and Red Hat will
not stand behind anything for which they do not have source. Poof.
So somehow bozo is blaming Mike? Naughty naughty. Mike doesn't make
policy. Mike is not boss. Mike either does what boss wans or Beros
out to unemployment, however temporarily. (And this is NOT a good
market for that kind of a move.)
> >>>Or maybe I am getting it wrong here, lemme look at it the other
> >>>way. You don't want to support the project of a module? If so
> >>>then why dist software at all?
> >>
> >> Red Hat got where it is today by following a set of principles
> >> and values that have made it one of the largest and most used
> >> Linux distributions. Why distribute it all? Simple, because it
> >> is popular, and gaining more popularity daily - without including
> >> binary only modules.
> >
> >You are still misunderstanding what I am stating, your point was
> >"We can't fix it". The counter point to that is UMMMM you guys
> >have a habit of shipping broken software. So FIXING software
> >for you guys is sometimes a DEAD DUCK point.
>
> Bullshit. That is just a pure insult. It isn't even worth
> reading any further messages that you write. Welcome to my
> killfile after this message.
Ah bozo hasn't the *FOGGIEST* remotest inkling of a smidgin of a clue
where Red Hat software comes from. Red Hat does not write it all, sir
Bozo. Red Hat collates it and distributes it and attempts to perform
some bug fixes which it passes back to the official package maintainer.
Expect bugs. Don't blame them on Red Hat. Blame them on the package
maintainer - UNLESS Red Hat has made significant custom changes to
the package and it is these custom changes that have broken things. Red
Hat has made the conscious decision to distribute only code to which it
has source so that it has a chance of responding to critical problems
with repairs. It has never, however, claimed to have usurped the
maintainer's position as custodian of the master source accepting full
responsibility for all code bugs in anything it ships. Open Sores^H^H^Hurce
does not work that way. It works as well as it does BECAUSE source IS
available making repairs by the likes of Red Hat, Mandrake, SUSE, Debian,
or others feasible. It makes open source software more nimble with respect
to serious bug repairs than Apple or Microsoft could ever manage, in most
cases. (Sometimes a maintainer dissappears. That causes problems if nobody
else wants to take on the job.... And in some cases, such as nvidia, there
never is source available so fixes are impossible. That this bozo made
the error in presuming an equation of unfixable with merely broken and
fixable is a reflection of his lack of experience, thought, intellect,
or a combination of any two of the three or even all three at once. ie.
he revealed himself as a card carrying bozo.
> >> Absolutely and completely totally _NO_. Switch to another
> >> distribution that ships it if you must.
> >>
> >
> >Hmmmm, this is a great stand to take.
> >Our customers want their computers to work, HA! corporate users want
> >their wireless NICS to work. What are you gonna say.
> >Let me quote you correctly: "Absolutely and completely totally _NO_.
> >Switch to another distribution that ships it if you must."
>
> Precicely. You have that option, and are free to exercise it.
Indeed, he is in a position to REQUEST. He is not in a position to
demand. He is apparently too inexperienced with the world to have
learned the difference. Incidentally, Red Hat's attidude about modules
for which no source is available, such as nvidia drivers, is the same
as that of the Linux Kernel developers. If they cannot get their
fingers into the code themselves to fix what may be broken they want
nothing to do with it and indeed mark it as unfit for consumption or
at least unfit for support queries, complaints, bug reports, or even
toilet paper.
> >I thank god that you are not the CEO of RH, because if you were
> >and or if the CEO does shares your same opinions about overall
No bozo. The CEO *SETS* the marching orders Mike is following. Thou
has graduated from bozo to twit first class with that statement. Oy!
> >SOFTWARE SUPPORT & DIST., RH is bound to fail. That is when you
> >tell the market, screw you we will not PUT ON a seperate CD
> >drivers thar are not GPL (And look into it before you open your
> >mouth, the drivers I am speaking of are OPEN SOURCE just not GPL
> >- http://www.linux-wlan.com/linux-wlan/)
>
> Open source drivers are a different story. In one breath you are
> demanding we ship proprietary drivers, and in another one you are
> claiming that they are open source. Considering that, and
> considering your above statements differentiating "binary
> module" and "binary only module" (which are identical in the
> context of the discussion), I don't think you even understand the
> difference.
Mike, there is "Open Source" and the Microsoft version of "Open Source"
and everything inbetween. If the source is available but changes are not
allowed, even for bug fixes, unless the changes filter back to the
"owner" and then back out to the field this is not "Open Source" despite
appearances or what some idiot companies may call it.
Bozo, Red Hat has taken a stance about Open Source in the GPL sense. They
tend not to ship items which are not GPLed. They do make some exceptions.
Netscrap is one such, historically speaking. And just what ARE you talking
about that you are equating "binary module" with "binary only module" in
a world, the Linux world, in which "binary only module" means that source
code in a usable form is not available to accompany the binary modules that
are installed on systems.
> >> This discussion reminds me of getting a root canal, and I've
> >> never gotten one.
> >
> >You remind me of every other SIMPSONS COMIC BOOK STORE LOOKING GUY
> >that holds linux back.
>
> You remind me of that one random annoying person on our mailing
> lists each release, that makes me sick enough to not want to help
> people on our lists any more, as I'm not paid to do so, and I no
> longer enjoy the experience.
>
> So on that note, I bid the mailing list goodbye. I don't need to
> waste my time reading and responding to this mindless drivel.
>
> Feel free to fight amongst yourselves.
Thanks, Sir Twit, for driving Mike off. Mike is worth several dozen of you
to the rest of us on this list. For all the energy you spent whining you
could have gone and found your binary only code and installed it and had
your system running, if not supported, already. It takes real talent
gained from long experience to shoot oneself in the pedal extremity
quite so efficiently as you have. Did you take lessons from the former
upper management of Commodore?
{+_+} Sheesh!
--
Psyche-list mailing list
Psyche-list@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Sayonara (Was - Re: Dist. Suggestions)
- From: David Durst
- Re: Sayonara (Was - Re: Dist. Suggestions)
- From: Jesse Keating
- Re: Sayonara (Was - Re: Dist. Suggestions)
- References:
- Sayonara (Was - Re: Dist. Suggestions)
- From: Mike A. Harris
- Sayonara (Was - Re: Dist. Suggestions)
- Prev by Date: Re: sbin and /usr/sbin
- Next by Date: Re: Sayonara (Was - Re: Dist. Suggestions)
- Previous by thread: Re: Sayonara (Was - Re: Dist. Suggestions)
- Next by thread: Re: Sayonara (Was - Re: Dist. Suggestions)
- Index(es):
[Motherboards] [Kernel List] [Red Hat Install] [Red Hat Watch List] [Red Hat Development] [Red Hat 9] [Gimp] [Yosemite News]
