> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 2:23 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
>
>
> If you nor
If you nor any of the FreeBSD developers "know" about the 75xx series of
chipsets, then I guess that explains why the score is Linux 87, FreeBSD 2. and
getting worse by the day. Nicely done. What are you developing on, gaming
machines? Why have you trashed the OS to strengthen SMP computing when
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You guys couldnt even sweep up after the original FreeBSD team. What a
travesty. And apparently there aren't any technically capable
people using FreeBSD anymore, because they all seem very happy
with an O/S that is substantially slower than it was before. What a waste.
* Ted Mittelstaedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [0135 07:35]:
> Perhaps we all should ask why it is OK for SuperMicro to release
> a
> motherboard that is incompatible with the existing FreeBSD versions?
Because they hate our freedom, of course...
--
'One cannot make an omelette without breaking eg
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 10:54 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
>
>
> In a m
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 7:59 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
>
>
> Well appa
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 7:50 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
>
>
> Teddy,
&
In a message dated 1/6/05 2:10:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> Do you really have no contacts at SM or Dell? What kind of a development
>> org has no contacts with major vendors?
>
>It's not a question of not having contacts. It's a question of
>actually defining the pr
In a message dated 1/5/05 7:25:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> In a message dated 1/5/05 7:16:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Why are you here?
> >
> > I wish I could be as arrogant and condescending as you, but clearly you
> > were born wit
In a message dated 1/5/05 7:39:02 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Your point might have some teeth if the "newer" version were better, but
>the entire problem is that 5.x is much worse than 4.x, so there lies the
>issue. 4.10 is NOT supposed to be an "old" version. Its the pr
In a message dated 1/6/05 1:44:54 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> One system cost me 3 months salary in Russia. Is this how you
> treat your users? Why can't your developer use the machine they
> used to make 5.3 work?
>
>
>YOU are not PAYING the FreeBSD developers to de
On Jan 5, 2005, at 5:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The "tranquility" of this list is apparently because the people on
this list
are too technically incompetent to realize how badly botched 5.x is.
"thank you master, thank you for helping me get my mouse working, let
me kiss your boots"
Quick
On Wednesday 05 January 2005 04:20 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 1/5/05 7:16:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Why are you here?
> >
> > I wish I could be as arrogant and condescending as you, but clearly you
> > were born with an advantage in that a
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Colin J. Raven wrote:
> 4.10 *is* supported, and 5.3 works "as advertised" - what the hell is your
> *problem* exactly???
_
/| /| | | |
||__|| | |Please do not
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 08:57:37PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 03:48:05PM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> > Procmail is your friend. Something like:
> >
> > #
> > # Well-known AOL troll on FreeBSD.
> > #
> > :0:
> > * ^From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> You need to instead block
On Jan 5 at 19:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] launched this into the bitstream:
In a message dated 1/5/05 7:16:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why are you here?
I wish I could be as arrogant and condescending as you, but clearly you
were born with an advantage in that are
He has a Hol
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 4:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
>
>
> In a me
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Boris
> Spirialitious
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:50 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
>
>
> One system cost me 3 months
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> You need to instead block Tm[0-9]+ because he likes to change his
> address every few weeks [1].
Ah, thanks; filter updated accordingly :-)
> [1] Perhaps the counter reflects the number of times his AOL account
> has been deleted.
Indeed,
PS: cable.ro
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 03:48:05PM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Scott Bennett wrote:
>
> > Ah. So the troll didn't really expect *anybody* reasonably to
> > have provided support. It just wanted something to bitch about on this
> > list. It should go back to the bit
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Scott Bennett wrote:
> Ah. So the troll didn't really expect *anybody* reasonably to
> have provided support. It just wanted something to bitch about on this
> list. It should go back to the bit bucket it came from.
Procmail is your friend. Something like:
#
# Wel
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 17:58:53 EST the latest troll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
blathered:
>In a message dated 1/5/05 4:03:59 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> Besides ... with a name like hardcodeharry, I would expect a little more
>> intelligence; a little more willingness to
Jerry McAllister wrote:
Yes, and his holy mission seems to be to waste people's time and energy
trying to draw attention to himself without making any contribution of
value to the community. Less than two months ago, vastly excessive
amounts of bandwidth and delete effort were wasted in this lis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
Your point might have some teeth if the "newer" version were better, but
the entire problem is that 5.x is much worse than 4.x, so there lies the
issue. 4.10 is NOT supposed to be an "old" version. Its the production
version. Because its readily admitte
On Wednesday 05 January 2005 04:02 pm, Tom Vilot wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >so why are you even trying?
>
> Why are you on this list?
>
> This is a questions list. Not an advocacy list, not a "BSD SUX" list.
>
> Why are you here?
>
> I wish I could be as arrogant and condescending as you,
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 05:02:23PM -0700, Tom Vilot wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >=20
> > >so why are you even trying?=20
> > >
> >=20
> > Why are you on this list?
> >=20
> > This is a questions list. Not an advocacy list, not a "BSD SUX" list.
> >=20
> > Why are you here?
> >=20
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 07:20:06PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 1/5/05 7:16:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Why are you here?
> >
> > I wish I could be as arrogant and condescending as you, but clearly you
> > were born with an advantage in th
In a message dated 1/5/05 7:16:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Why are you here?
>
> I wish I could be as arrogant and condescending as you, but clearly you
> were born with an advantage in that are
He has a Holy Mission.
Yes, a mission to get the FreeBSD team to suppor
In a message dated 1/4/05 11:50:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> None of the new Supermicro hardware I've tried works with Freebsd
> 4.10 properly. I've seen that this has been reported by others.
> They are all based on the 7520 and 7530 Intel chips. 5.3 works
> ok, but
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 05:02:23PM -0700, Tom Vilot wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >so why are you even trying?
> >
>
> Why are you on this list?
>
> This is a questions list. Not an advocacy list, not a "BSD SUX" list.
>
> Why are you here?
>
> I wish I could be as arrogant and condes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so why are you even trying?
Why are you on this list?
This is a questions list. Not an advocacy list, not a "BSD SUX" list.
Why are you here?
I wish I could be as arrogant and condescending as you, but clearly you
were born with an advantage in that arena.
_
In a message dated 1/5/05 6:29:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whine, whine, whine, bitch, bitch, bitch.
You aren't technically capable of grasping a single point in this discussion,
Tom,
so why are you even trying?
_
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whine, whine, whine, bitch, bitch, bitch.
So go use Linux. Someone is twisting your arm?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
In a message dated 1/5/05 3:59:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Rather, it was the people who *developed* the *free* and very powerful
operating system (that he is attempting to use) he called stupid. I'm
still waiting to see him post an apology.
I, for one, am humbled by
In a message dated 1/5/05 4:03:59 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Besides ... with a name like hardcodeharry, I would expect a little more
> intelligence; a little more willingness to dig into things. A slight
> tendency to ask the question: "how can I hack this code to work
> I, for one, am humbled by the BSD teams...
I have come out of hibernation early in order to agree
with all of the above points.
Back to bed for me, Good night.
Mark
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/list
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 13:58:47 -0700, Tom Vilot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Besides ... with a name like hardcodeharry, I would expect a little more
> intelligence; a little more willingness to dig into things. A slight
> tendency to ask the question: "how can I hack this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think he was calling the members of this list stupid.
You are correct. He wasn't.
Rather, it was the people who *developed* the *free* and very powerful
operating system (that he is attempting to use) he called stupid. I'm
still waiting to see him post an apolog
In a message dated 1/5/05 3:00:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
>>Asking a guy from a poor country to donate his hardware to a
>>US organization at least partially funded by Yahoo is "helpful"? What
planet
>>are you from?
>>
>The planet where 99% of the posts on this list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Asking a guy from a poor country to donate his hardware to a
US organization at least partially funded by Yahoo is "helpful"? What planet
are you from?
The planet where 99% of the posts on this list are helpful, and the one
from this guy (who calls the members of this l
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, you've "missed" the fact that kernels and distributions are independent
of one-another in linux. "Redhat" is just a distribution and has little to do
with what particular kernel version you are using.
First of all, that wasn't missed. It was quite intentional. I am
In a message dated 1/5/05 2:39:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
>>One system cost me 3 months salary in Russia. Is this how you treat your
>>users? Why can't your developer use the machine they used to make 5.3 work?
>>
>>Everyone tell me to use LINUX. Now I know why. You s
In a message dated 1/5/05 1:20:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
>>Linux also doesnt do a major release until its arguably better than the
>>previous version. Another lesson that the FreeBSD camp could well learn
from. >You do
>>your tweaking in the confines of your labs, no
One system cost me 3 months salary in Russia. Is this how you treat your users?
Why can't your developer use the machine they used to make 5.3 work?
Everyone tell me to use LINUX. Now I know why. You support bad slow version and
not good one. Very stupid people.
Thank you for trolling on an othe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Linux also doesnt do a major release until its arguably better than the
previous version. Another lesson that the FreeBSD camp could well learn from. You do
your tweaking in the confines of your labs, not at the expense of your
customer base..
I'm sorry ... I missed some
In a message dated 1/5/05 12:23:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
>> Everyone tell me to use LINUX. Now I know why. You support
>> bad slow version and not good one. Very stupid people.
>>
>FreeBSD is more organized and managed more professionally compared to many
>of the L
ROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Boris
>> Spirialitious Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 3:25 PM
>> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>> Subject: Supermicro Hardware and
taedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Boris
> Spirialitious
> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 3:25 PM
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
&g
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Boris
> Spirialitious
> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 3:25 PM
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
>
>
> None of the new Superm
None of the new Supermicro hardware I've tried works with Freebsd 4.10
properly. I've seen that this has been reported by others. They are all based
on the 7520 and 7530 Intel chips. 5.3 works ok, but a 3.4/800 processor on 5.3
is slower than a 3.06/533 processor on our old 7502 chipset based s
50 matches
Mail list logo
