FWIW, Hey, I have been to the RTFM side, as well as asking if "YXZ feature is looked into"
But I see the response to Mr. Allen's RFC (See Initial Posting) appropriate. Including the initial inside humour. In fact, it did spawn a related set of tests where the differences between amd64, and i386 are different (it appeared to me at least) in the mechanisms used for allocations. I benefited from the result of the RFC if in fact I considered the response to the Initial Comment Request - appropriate. Oh, and Mr. Allen. Since it was a "bussword" RFC you posted, and your lack of comprehension and sensitivity to the response. I (Personally) would prefer if you used a Operating System running on x86 platforms that you decide (if you comprehend it) which licensing solution you can afford. Grow Up, code, hack, and be Free if you want to, but I politely invite you to not Whine on and on about your sensitivities. -- I like my Cheese with a bottle of Merlot, not with a sandwich and Baloney and an ASR38. (grumble) <^G -- DING!> Oh Wait, Leave out the ASR38 I need that for the wide listings... -sean > Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 02:51:52 +0000 > From: jake...@sdf.lonestar.org > To: tech@openbsd.org > Subject: Re: UBC? > > On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 03:28:22PM -0700, Darrin Chandler wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 03:05:37PM -0700, Nick Bender wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Bob Beck <b...@ualberta.ca> wrote: > > > > On 1 February 2010 14:09, Donald Allen <donaldcal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I have not responded to this thread because I was angered by it and > > > >> did not want to respond in anger. That has passed. But this thread is > > > >> unfortunately all too typical of a pattern of ridicule and downright > > > >> nastiness that occurs much too often on the OpenBSD lists. > > > > > > > > .... > > > > > > > > Well I certainly didn't get that impression from this thread, Sorry > > > > you did.. Happy Trails. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ditto. Thought this thread was fairly productive: > > > > > > - question raised > > > - clarification sought > > > - clarification provided > > > - solution given > > > - bug found > > > - patch proposed and debated > > > > > > > You could enforce minimum levels > > > > of civility, as many such communities do, without impeding the flow of > > > > technical information a it, but you choose not to. > > > > > > Civility is in the eye of the moderator. I prefer my debate unfiltered... > > > > There was some belittling of Allen for asking about UBC. I don't think > > it added anything. Not even humor. Beck's initial response was a good > > one, clarifying and offering something to try, but at least one person > > jumped in with unhelpful comments. There were also informative and > > interesting replies, and in fact these made of the bulk of the thread. > > While this thread was relatively mild compared to some I think Allen has > > a point. There's just no need to escalate what should have been a purely > > technical discussion into an ad hominem attack. > > are you talking about Bret's reply about buzzwords? imo, that's what > that reply was about, buzzwords. there was nothing personal. see, > the way buzzwords work, is they get stuck in your (as in most people) > head, then they come out when you have a idea but don't know quite > how to express it. which is clearly the situation here. > > I think readers of OpenBSD lists are far too sensitive. there, that's > a personal 'attack' on all y'all. > > -- > jake...@sdf.lonestar.org > SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org > _________________________________________________________________ Check your Hotmail from your phone. http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9708121
