> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 07:43:05PM +, Jacob Meuser wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 03:01:40PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote:
>> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 04:18:42PM +0100, Miod Vallat wrote:
>> > > >> SO now do you want FireEngine? Or rather SMPng networking? Or
>> > > >> would you like ReallyHyp
> > > Nonsense, as long as you can plug in some plutonium, things should be
> > > fine.
> >
> > Are you tellin' me this sucker is nuclear?
>
> ...Mr. Fusion? ;)
Not until there's a Chorus about it.
Miod
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 07:43:05PM +, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 03:01:40PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 04:18:42PM +0100, Miod Vallat wrote:
> > > >> SO now do you want FireEngine? Or rather SMPng networking? Or
> > > >> would you like ReallyHyperFast
Jacob Meuser wrote:
> Marc Espie wrote:
> > Nonsense, as long as you can plug in some plutonium, things should be
> > fine.
>
> Are you tellin' me this sucker is nuclear?
...Mr. Fusion? ;)
-Nix Fan.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 03:01:40PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 04:18:42PM +0100, Miod Vallat wrote:
> > >> SO now do you want FireEngine? Or rather SMPng networking? Or
> > >> would you like ReallyHyperFastZoomStreamCyberWoosh?
>
> > >Now that you've brought it up, I would r
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 04:18:42PM +0100, Miod Vallat wrote:
> >> SO now do you want FireEngine? Or rather SMPng networking? Or
> >> would you like ReallyHyperFastZoomStreamCyberWoosh?
> >Now that you've brought it up, I would really like a
> >ReallyHyperFastZoomStreamCyberWoosh TCP stack. Just m
SO now do you want FireEngine? Or rather SMPng networking? Or
would you like ReallyHyperFastZoomStreamCyberWoosh?
Now that you've brought it up, I would really like a
ReallyHyperFastZoomStreamCyberWoosh TCP stack. Just make sure it
doesn't require 1.2Jigawatts of power and have interesting si
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 8:52 AM, knitti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SO now do you want FireEngine? Or rather SMPng networking? Or
> would you like ReallyHyperFastZoomStreamCyberWoosh?
Now that you've brought it up, I would really like a
ReallyHyperFastZoomStreamCyberWoosh TCP stack. Just make
On 2/19/08, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> something as good as FireEngine,
I'm following this thread with quite some amusement, but one thing is
not in the least clear to me: why do you think you want "something as
good as FireEngine". Heck, even under the assumption FireEngine is
R
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:15:41 +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 1:05 PM, ropers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 20/02/2008, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Feb 20, 2008 4:58 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTE
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 1:05 PM, ropers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 20/02/2008, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Feb 20, 2008 4:58 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-17 13:38]:
> > > > Wouldn't it be nice to hav
On 20/02/2008, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2008 4:58 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-17 13:38]:
> > > Wouldn't it be nice to have a high performance networking stack?
> >
> > yeah.
> > guess what we have
On 02/20/08 15:00, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 02:14:31PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote:
>>> But that >100 year old technology used to be DC earlier, then it was
>>> converted to AC because of its inherent benefits.
Marketing blurb.
>> way over a hundred years ago, yes (except
On Wednesday 20 February 2008 13:14, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-20 14:07]:
> > On Feb 20, 2008 5:52 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-20 13:12]:
> > > > On Feb 20, 2008 4:58 PM, Henning Brauer
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 02:14:31PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote:
> > But that >100 year old technology used to be DC earlier, then it was
> > converted to AC because of its inherent benefits.
>
> way over a hundred years ago, yes (except for some small irrelevant
> isles like parts of new york if
On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> > isn't your computer running on >>100 years old technology called
> > "electricity"?
>
> But that >100 year old technology used to be DC earlier, then it was
> converted to AC because of its inherent benefits.
> Similarly, wouldn't it have bee
Henning Brauer wrote:
* Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-20 14:07]:
(not that now I can do anything about it, all's lost for me)
Could you please read http://research.sun.com/minds/2007-0710/
yeah, i did, lots of marketing blubber, lots of bla bla, lots of vague
indications, nothin
On 2008/02/20 14:14, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-20 14:07]:
> > On Feb 20, 2008 5:52 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > isn't your computer running on >>100 years old technology called
> > > "electricity"?
> > But that >100 year old technol
* Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-20 14:07]:
> On Feb 20, 2008 5:52 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-20 13:12]:
> > > On Feb 20, 2008 4:58 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTEC
Touchi!
--
Thanks,
Jordi Espasa Clofent
could you please stop this shit and continue the conversation privately?
People registered at misc know well why they are using obsd. We don't
need this discussion.
2008/2/20, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-20 13:12]:
>
> > On Feb 20, 2008 4:58
On Feb 20, 2008 5:52 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-20 13:12]:
>
> > On Feb 20, 2008 4:58 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-17 13:38]:
> > > > Wouldn't it be nice to have a
* Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-20 13:12]:
> On Feb 20, 2008 4:58 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-17 13:38]:
> > > Wouldn't it be nice to have a high performance networking stack?
> >
> > yeah.
> > guess what we have?
> >
On Feb 20, 2008 4:58 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-17 13:38]:
> > Wouldn't it be nice to have a high performance networking stack?
>
> yeah.
> guess what we have?
> exactly that.
> (which doesn't mean it could be even faster)
Pardon i
* Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-17 13:38]:
> Wouldn't it be nice to have a high performance networking stack?
yeah.
guess what we have?
exactly that.
(which doesn't mean it could be even faster)
--
Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BS Web Services, http://bsws.de
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:11:34 +0530
"Mayuresh Kathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2008 12:52 PM, Duncan Patton a Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:47:54 +0530
> > "Mayuresh Kathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 20, 2008 2:59 AM, Ted Unangst <[EMA
On Feb 20, 2008 12:52 PM, Duncan Patton a Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:47:54 +0530
> "Mayuresh Kathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 20, 2008 2:59 AM, Ted Unangst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Feb 19, 2008 4:50 AM, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:47:54 +0530
"Mayuresh Kathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2008 2:59 AM, Ted Unangst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Feb 19, 2008 4:50 AM, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > That's the reason I've been gathering good C developers, so that they
> > >
On Feb 20, 2008 2:59 AM, Ted Unangst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2008 4:50 AM, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That's the reason I've been gathering good C developers, so that they
> > could either;
> > 1. take up complex projects like FireEngine/DTrace,
> > 2. write repla
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 11:39:50AM +0100, Zbigniew Baniewski wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 09:07:50AM +0100, Alexander Hall wrote:
>
> > The suggestion about installing packages into / is fine if
> > stated as a suggestion and/or question. I do not agree, but still I
> > think the question is
On Feb 19, 2008 4:50 AM, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's the reason I've been gathering good C developers, so that they
> could either;
> 1. take up complex projects like FireEngine/DTrace,
> 2. write replacements for as many GNU tools/utilities as possible,
> 3. be a landing sta
s have feeling now?
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Behalf Of Zbigniew Baniewski
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 8:20 AM
>> To: misc@openbsd.org
>> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>>
Zbigniew Baniewski wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 12:52:35AM -0600, Tony Abernethy wrote:
>
> > I may be an oaf, but it is with FULL REALIZATION THAT I AM
> SENDING THIS TO
> > THE LIST
> >
> > MY PURPOSE IN DOING SO IS TO PAINT YOU WITH SOMEHTING
> RESEMBLING YOUR TRUE
> > COLORS.
>
> Is
Zbigniew Baniewski wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 08:37:33AM -0600, Tony Abernethy wrote:
>
> > You mean that the proponents of threads are overyly emotional?
>
> If the sides are calling each other with terms like "idiot" -
> or something
> similar - do you really find it as non-emotional?
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 08:42:13AM -0600, Tony Abernethy wrote:
> If you mean it is now my private property, then I am free to do with it as I
> please.
> Otherwise, if it should be kept private, maybe it should be kept private.
>
> Why should a discussion of threads be souch an emotional one?
>
; From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Zbigniew Baniewski
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 8:20 AM
> To: misc@openbsd.org
> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 08:12:46AM -0600, Tony Abernethy wrote:
>
> > Fair N
rg
> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 12:52:35AM -0600, Tony Abernethy wrote:
>
> > I may be an oaf, but it is with FULL REALIZATION THAT I AM
> SENDING THIS TO
> > THE LIST
> >
> > MY PURPOSE IN DOING SO IS TO PAINT YOU WI
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 08:12:46AM -0600, Tony Abernethy wrote:
> Fair No.
> It is like dead fish after 4 days.
> Actually, what was "private" in that message?
You don't have to wonder, what. Any correspondence, which hasn't been sent
to the public, is private - and needs the agreement of the pa
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 12:52:35AM -0600, Tony Abernethy wrote:
> I may be an oaf, but it is with FULL REALIZATION THAT I AM SENDING THIS TO
> THE LIST
>
> MY PURPOSE IN DOING SO IS TO PAINT YOU WITH SOMEHTING RESEMBLING YOUR TRUE
> COLORS.
Is it fair? Some day, someone other will forward _your_
Mayuresh Kathe ha scritto:
On Feb 19, 2008 5:16 PM, Duncan Patton a Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:33:12 +0530
"Mayuresh Kathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It just led me to ponder, what is OpenBSD's ultimate goal?
What, exactly, is yours?
My u
William Boshuck ha scritto:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 10:16:08AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
... I've NEVER got any of the code for FREE,
Yes, you did. The code is free. The CDs are not.
Maybe Mr.Mayuresh Kathe, dont know anoncvs[1].
By a 4.2 release, we can download a bootable
On Feb 19, 2008 5:16 PM, Duncan Patton a Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:33:12 +0530
> "Mayuresh Kathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It just led me to ponder, what is OpenBSD's ultimate goal?
>
> What, exactly, is yours?
My ultimate goal is to have an OS which woul
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:33:12 +0530
"Mayuresh Kathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It just led me to ponder, what is OpenBSD's ultimate goal?
What, exactly, is yours?
I've read thru this thread and you are remarkably obscure
about your intentions, but it seems to me that OBSD somehow
does not f
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 09:07:50AM +0100, Alexander Hall wrote:
> The suggestion about installing packages into / is fine if
> stated as a suggestion and/or question. I do not agree, but still I
> think the question is valid. However, adding "It doesn't need any
> funding to fix this." makes it
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 2:41 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
> You claim that the thread is already polluted far beyond your feeble
> efforts to further such.
> So you agree that you are polluting the l
Zbigniew Baniewski wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 12:42:38AM +0100, Marc Espie wrote:
You're an idiot.
[..]
Think about it.
Idiots don't think.
If you didn't knew it - you're even bigger idiot, than I am.
Oh, but they do! They are just not very successful. ;-)
The suggestion about ins
correspondences.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mayuresh Kathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 12:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
> Tony, you are really weird, stop polluting the mailing list with all
>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 12:46 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
> You are an Oaf, you don't realise that you are sending all these
> useless emails to the list where its not needed, while *I* on the
> other hand have been only
sentences you
seem to like.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mayuresh Kathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 12:31 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
> There you go again, disconnected from reality.
> Pleas
I think therefore I am.
I think you are a billy goat, therefore you are.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mayuresh Kathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 12:31 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
&g
Dead billy goat or dead nanny goat?
which are you?
> -Original Message-
> From: Mayuresh Kathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 12:26 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
> Are you as weird as your w
an entertaining diversion.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mayuresh Kathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 10:18 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
> Your logic is flawed.
> So is your ability to understand
Mayuresh Kathe
> On Feb 17, 2008 5:50 PM, Tony Abernethy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> > >
> > > OpenBSD is an OS with amazing security and stability, but
> it has too
> > > few modern features.
> > >
> > H related?
>
> thats exactly my point, our mindset has be
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 10:16:08AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>
> ... I've NEVER got any of the code for FREE,
Yes, you did. The code is free. The CDs are not.
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 10:11:32AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>
> ... why don't you and rest of the team, led by Theo take a
> concious decision to stop downloads?
OpenBSD is introduced (e.g., on the main web page) by three,
adjectives. It might be worthwhile to grasp the first of
those befor
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 03:10:12PM +0100, Zbigniew Baniewski wrote:
>
> I noticed, that default path, where software from binary pkg and "ports"
> gets unpacked, is /usr/local hierarchy - unfortunately, it's also the
> "traditional" default of every individual source *.tar.gz package - such
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 10:12:09AM -0500, David Higgs wrote:
> Does the -B option to pkg_add do exactly this? Or YOU could do the
> equivalent and tell ./configure to install to a different base
> directory. This doesn't need any funding either.
Nope, -B is mostly for chroot and flashdist-like i
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 12:42:38AM +0100, Marc Espie wrote:
> You're an idiot.
> [..]
> Think about it.
Idiots don't think.
If you didn't knew it - you're even bigger idiot, than I am.
Thanks for conversation.
--
pozdrawiam / regards
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 02:31:13PM +0100, Zbigniew Baniewski wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 01:07:06PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> > By this, I mean, developers *are* working on improving the features
> > currently offered by OpenBSD. In general people work on things which
> > they will f
> On Feb 17, 2008 11:23 PM, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You are talking about nebulous features that are over hyped and
> > under proven. One needs a problem first before fixing it. You are
> > putting it the wrong way around by saying "hey I'd like a super duper
> > faster tcp
> -Urspr|ngliche Nachricht-
> Von: David Higgs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 17. Februar 2008 16:54
> An: openbsd misc
> Cc: OpenBSD-Misc
> Betreff: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
>
> On Feb 17, 2008 7:36 AM, openbsd misc
> <[EMAIL PROTE
If there were no downloads, there would be less users who donate. I'd
dare to claim some people have just downloaded and donated instead of
buying the CD - in my case it makes sense since I can afford very little
and the production of CDs would eat some of that little. I miss the
stickers, though.
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 10:11:32AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> I for one buy CDs every year, year after year.
>
> Best,
>
> ~Mayuresh
The CD sets you buy must be different than the ones I buy; mine don't
come with a ballot for voting on features.
Please proxy vote for me and check "[ ] Mo
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 10:11:32AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> > > Also, we don't get to use his code for FREE, I suppose most of the
> > > users *buy* CD sets.
> >
> > If only they did. A miniscule percentage of the user community buys
> > CD's, and the sales are dropping. The vast majority of
Not lies; we have a 5000 emails thread to prove that.
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 07:35:55AM +0059, Han Boetes wrote:
> Lies
>
> chefren wrote:
> > ... Richard Stallman stopped [coding] doing so long time ago...
>
> > B) Richard Stallman puts users first, =like you!=, Richard Stallman
> >=believ
Hey folks,
i have been writing software about 6 year since i "finnished" my
university course. OpenBSD has always been impressive to my eyes.
Since correctness/security is "conditio sine qua non", i disagree as a
group of developer has it as goal. Goal should be performance,
portability usability.
What shit are you talking about?
On Feb 18, 2008 2:01 PM, System Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 18 Feb 2008 at 10:16, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>
> > On Feb 18, 2008 7:57 AM, Leonardo Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > > Actually what Ted has done was utterly disastrous, h
Come on guys, calm down, just stay what you are currently.
Just do your job.
Make OpenBSD the best router/firewall/server OS ever, you have the right
features for that now,
and I hope you will extend it in the nearest future.
And do not listen to those trolls.
Thank you all for what you do gu
On 18 Feb 2008 at 10:16, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2008 7:57 AM, Leonardo Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > Actually what Ted has done was utterly disastrous, he knows his
> own
> > > code well enough to have completed it.
> > > BTW, you are as big an oaf as Richard Stallman, y
On Feb 18, 2008 1:55 AM, Marc Balmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>
> > think a generally usable 64/128 bit file system,
>
> you have that much porn that you need a 128bit fs?
Ya I do :)
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 10:20:22PM -0500, System Administrator wrote:
> To the majority on this list -- my apologies if I end up feeding this
> troll instead of making him 'go away'. to the OP -- this is why you got
> absolutely NO answer from the devs. and now for the archives in the
> hopes t
> Leonardo, I've NEVER got any of the code for FREE, I've always paid
> for it by buying CDs, unlike you who might have done an FTP install,
> you're a cheap-skate aren't you.
> Go buy yourself a CD set, contribute to the OpenBSD foundation, or
> better still, since you are talking about flying pig
On Feb 18, 2008 7:57 AM, Leonardo Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Actually what Ted has done was utterly disastrous, he knows his own
> > code well enough to have completed it.
> > BTW, you are as big an oaf as Richard Stallman, you keep ranting about
> > how you've put in your blood, swea
Lies
chefren wrote:
> ... Richard Stallman stopped [coding] doing so long time ago...
> B) Richard Stallman puts users first, =like you!=, Richard Stallman
>=believes= users are more important than coders so coders should be
>enslaved by the users. Which is plain STUPID since without code
On Feb 18, 2008 2:22 AM, raven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mayuresh Kathe ha scritto:
> > Raven, learn to write understandable English first, then try to reply
> > to my mails.
> >
> >
> I will try, thanks for a suggestion, english not is my mother tongue.
> But, you still dumb.
English isn't my
On Feb 18, 2008 2:25 AM, Kenneth R Westerback <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:23:44AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>
> > On Feb 17, 2008 11:23 PM, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Let me take a stab of responding to this...
> >
> > Thanks for responding...
>
On Feb 18, 2008 1:52 AM, Jason Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 17, 2008, at 2:58 PM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>
> > On Feb 18, 2008 1:16 AM, David Higgs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Feb 17, 2008 1:53 PM, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Its good to know that Ted did
To the majority on this list -- my apologies if I end up feeding this
troll instead of making him 'go away'. to the OP -- this is why you got
absolutely NO answer from the devs. and now for the archives in the
hopes that at least some of the future would be posters will research
before posting.
> Actually what Ted has done was utterly disastrous, he knows his own
> code well enough to have completed it.
> BTW, you are as big an oaf as Richard Stallman, you keep ranting about
> how you've put in your blood, sweat and tears, but forget to
> understand the point that without us users you are
> If all our users bought a CD set there would be a *lot* more
> development going on by dedicated/paid developers. If corporations
> needing paperwork to donate would contact www.openbsdfoundation.org
> and donate there would be a lot more development going on. And if pigs
> could code as well as
Hi,
> It gets stranger.
> How is a bare bones code ever going to be useful to a non developing user?
> Its useful to them only when its part of an overall system.
> And that overall system in a really usable state is only available via
> CDs which need to be purchased.
aehm, hello ? I do buy the c
Jussi Peltola ha scritto:
For each message in this thread that I consider insulting (10 so far), I
will donate 1 euro to OpenBSD to compensate for lost developer time
reading such messages. Being a student my budget can't take more, but at
least I try to be grateful.
Keep up the good work making
Zbigniew Baniewski ha scritto:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 09:52:34PM +0100, raven wrote:
Raven, learn to write understandable English first, then try to reply
to my mails.
I will try, thanks for a suggestion, english not is my mother tongue.
But, you still dumb.
I can see seve
For each message in this thread that I consider insulting (10 so far), I
will donate 1 euro to OpenBSD to compensate for lost developer time
reading such messages. Being a student my budget can't take more, but at
least I try to be grateful.
Keep up the good work making an OS that is only fixed wh
- Original Message -
From: "Mayuresh Kathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "OpenBSD-Misc"
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: What is our ultimate goal??
On Feb 18, 2008 1:04 AM, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 20
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:19:55AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> So what you are saying is that what the god father of BSD file systems
> (Marshal Kirk McKusik) is doing is wrong?
Last year i went to a 2 day kernel internals tutorial run by Kirk
MsKusik
and he was more than aware
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:19:55AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> That's why I called you an idiot.
> The project is not a research project, but a real live production
> grade code working under Solaris 10.
There is a saying "horses for courses". It means use something fit for
the job. You don't
On 2/17/08 10:14 PM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
BTW, you are as big an oaf as Richard Stallman, you keep ranting about
how you've put in your blood, sweat and tears, but forget to
understand the point that without us users you are nothing.
Ehhh... 2 Big Mistakes...
A) Marco does code, as far as I
On 2/17/08 8:04 PM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
I'm not belittling the developers,
You do. They =give= software to you, for free, and you say it's not good
enough. The only reason I reply is that in general your posts are refreshing
but on this you are plain wrong.
> just that I really got irrit
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 09:52:34PM +0100, raven wrote:
> >Raven, learn to write understandable English first, then try to reply
> >to my mails.
> >
> >
> I will try, thanks for a suggestion, english not is my mother tongue.
> But, you still dumb.
I can see several _public_ answers to _quite pri
On Feb 17, 2008 2:49 PM, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not telling Ted what to do at all, you're just assuming it in your
> blind fury over me coming out with the truth that most of *your*
> coding effort is directly or indirectly supported by non-developer
> users who do so by bu
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:19:55AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2008 1:04 AM, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:23:44AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> > > Its good to know that Ted did indeed try to scratch an itch of his and
> > > laid down some
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:19:55AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> I'm not telling Ted what to do at all, you're just assuming it in your
> blind fury over me coming out with the truth that most of *your*
> coding effort is directly or indirectly supported by non-developer
> users who do so by buyin
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 10:31:00PM +0100, chefren wrote:
> Hm, should be the way you try to contact them,
You mean, a question like: "Hallo, looking for a contact to *** ***, OpenBSD
developer - is this e-mail address a valid contact?" isn't quite proper way?
--
p
On 2/17/08 3:13 PM, Zbigniew Baniewski wrote:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 03:53:52PM +0200, Michael Dexter wrote:
Are they willing to take a suggestions from the users side?
Ask them.
During last 3 weeks I tried to contact 3 (yes, three) devs. None of them
responded even with "get lost".
Hm, s
On Feb 18, 2008 1:04 AM, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:23:44AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> > Its good to know that Ted did indeed try to scratch an itch of his and
> > laid down some ground work for future developers to take it beyond its
> > basic level
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:23:44AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> On Feb 17, 2008 11:23 PM, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Let me take a stab of responding to this...
>
> Thanks for responding...
>
> > On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 05:33:12PM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
Mayuresh Kathe ha scritto:
Raven, learn to write understandable English first, then try to reply
to my mails.
I will try, thanks for a suggestion, english not is my mother tongue.
But, you still dumb.
~Mayuresh
Francesco
On Feb 18, 2008 1:23 AM, Todd Alan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Its good to know that Ted did indeed try to scratch an itch of his and
> > laid down some ground work for future developers to take it beyond its
> > basic level.
> > But, it would have been *nicer* if Ted had put in some mor
On Feb 17, 2008 2:58 PM, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2008 1:16 AM, David Higgs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Feb 17, 2008 1:53 PM, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > His code is free to anyone that wants it for free. Do you not
> > understand how the BSD l
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
