You made it all up.

<zeurk...@volny.cz> wrote:

> theo wrote:
> > That is a rewriting of history.
> 
> It's history the way meknows it. Mecertainly predates some of it.
> 
> > The disklabel format predates the PC.
> 
> Indeed. Mewasn't sure where and when exactly it appeared, so meleft that
> bit out. But medid know it was older, and metried to communicate that
> fact (obviously mefailed -- meapologizes).
> 
> > It came from the the ancient attempt to handle things in CSRG's
> > 4.3reno/4.4 work on the hp300. It was probably a rewrite of the
> > native HPUX disk format.
> 
> Hmm, hp300, eh?
> 
> > This was then put on all the other architectures, as a unified
> > view of the disk. It was modified and extended on as as-needed
> > basis.
> >
> > Rewriting the history like this is pathetic inaccurate and
> > narrowminded. Your history is absolutely false and you've made
> > up a bunch of balony.
> 
> So, what did memake up? Did mepresent a timeline? An exact order of
> events? Did mepresent a scientific study? Or didmejust try to give an
> overview of things in terms that Groot (and many others, mesuspects) may
> just understand?
> 
> > It is not true, and even a elementary
> > review of the history of disklabel.h back into the early NetBSD
> > tree will make it clear what's going on.
> 
> Like mesaid, it's the history the way meknows it. Me's not a bloody
> authority on the history of either BSD or the IBM pee-cee, *at all*.
> 
> Perhaps meshould've made that clearer.
> 
> > OH, and I did most of the early work post-CSRG, because we needed
> > to "emulate" this on SunOS, and I ported Torek's sparc code into
> > NetBSD.
> 
> Mehas _no doubt at all_ that you know BSD (including its history) better
> than me (that is, of course, an understatement). 
> 
> > I urge you to stop posting such balony.
> 
> Then it's me turn to urge you to not read me overview as an historical
> account of any exactness.
> 
> After all, the goal, for me, was trying to help Groot understand the
> relationships he sought clarification for.
> 
> Perhaps meindeed should've included a disclaimer. Then again, mehas no
> offical role here (nor does mewant one), and in no way are me words to
> be taken for the one and universal truth. 
> 
> Can we please just assume that Groot is mature enough to be able to form
> his own view based on our individual contributions?
> 
> Me'd like that.
> 
>           --zeurkous.
> 
> -- 
> Friggin' Machines!

Reply via email to