Re: Regarding the ULTRIX and OSF1 compats

On March 16, 2019 5:02:46 PM Maxime Villard <[email protected]> wrote:
> Le 16/03/2019 =C3=A0 17:44, Dave McGuire a =C3=A9crit :
>> 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 g=
ood
> 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 wo=
rked
> on the NetBSD kernel over the last five years, to bring stability, perfor=
mance
> and security improvements in all of the system. I've redesigned a good pa=
rt of
> our x86 port, I've developed all the complex fixes for the speculation bu=
gs,
> 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 miscellan=
eous
> things I've done in and for NetBSD.

  We'll thanks for that. (seriously, thank you)  But you obviously think th=
is 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 eve=
n 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 li=
ke to label me as clueless because I voice opposition to your personal agen=
da, 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 deploy=
ed thousands (many thousands) of NetBSD systems in commercial environments.=
  And I have used and depended upon the functionality that you seek to remo=
ve.

  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 t=
o 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

--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA