* [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... @ 2006-01-19 17:54 Ronald G Minnich 2006-01-19 20:43 ` Charles Forsyth 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Ronald G Minnich @ 2006-01-19 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs when is a .so not a .so? when it's a ld script of course! yup, /lib/libc.so on my fc4 box is a ..... script. which is why l4 would not build ... /bin/ld from olden times does not understand the GROUP command below. [rminnich@q ~]$ file /usr/lib/libc.so /usr/lib/libc.so: ASCII C program text [rminnich@q ~]$ cat !$ cat /usr/lib/libc.so /* GNU ld script Use the shared library, but some functions are only in the static library, so try that secondarily. */ OUTPUT_FORMAT(elf32-i386) GROUP ( /lib/libc.so.6 /usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a AS_NEEDED ( /lib/ld-linux.so.2 ) ) [rminnich@q ~]$ ron ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-19 17:54 [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all Ronald G Minnich @ 2006-01-19 20:43 ` Charles Forsyth 2006-01-19 22:28 ` Bruce Ellis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Charles Forsyth @ 2006-01-19 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans >>when is a .so not a .so? when it's a ld script of course! >>yup, /lib/libc.so on my fc4 box is a ..... script. curiously, i was just installing fc4 on a machine today. following an i/o error on a few blocks of a hard drive containing an ext3, that had emptied /usr/etc to the confusion of all, subsequent use of redhat-something's fsck destroyed the whole file system rather instantly, so i thought it might be time for an upgrade. fc4's installation said there was an i/o error on installation, that was ``a serious problem'', it could not continue, OK? as usual my ``that's not OK, actually'' met with a blank face, and OK rebooted the system. i think it's all a hint to replace the drive. clearly, from ron's message, i'm in for a good time! we'll know computing has cracked it when that sort of thing is a question on ``who wants to be a millionaire?''. all helps to keep those synapses active. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-19 20:43 ` Charles Forsyth @ 2006-01-19 22:28 ` Bruce Ellis 2006-01-20 11:58 ` Devon H. O'Dell 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Bruce Ellis @ 2006-01-19 22:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs i like it when chip companies ask "why would you want to do that" and the obvious answer is "because the data sheet says i can and i want to". i've been thru this with a few vendors. brucee On 1/20/06, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net> wrote: > >>when is a .so not a .so? when it's a ld script of course! > >>yup, /lib/libc.so on my fc4 box is a ..... script. > > curiously, i was just installing fc4 on a machine today. > following an i/o error on a few blocks of a hard drive containing an ext3, > that had emptied /usr/etc to the confusion of all, subsequent use of > redhat-something's fsck destroyed the whole file system rather instantly, > so i thought it might be time for an upgrade. > fc4's installation said there was an i/o error on installation, > that was ``a serious problem'', it could not continue, OK? > as usual my ``that's not OK, actually'' met with a blank face, > and OK rebooted the system. i think it's all a hint to replace the drive. > clearly, from ron's message, i'm in for a good time! > we'll know computing has cracked it when that sort of thing > is a question on ``who wants to be a millionaire?''. > all helps to keep those synapses active. > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-19 22:28 ` Bruce Ellis @ 2006-01-20 11:58 ` Devon H. O'Dell 2006-01-20 16:08 ` jmk 2006-01-20 17:33 ` David Leimbach 0 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Devon H. O'Dell @ 2006-01-20 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs The specific reason many Linuxes do this is for i386 compat on AMD64 architectures. It's horribly broken, but is only slightly worse than the way FreeBSD implements it, which is to have /usr/lib32 --Devon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 11:58 ` Devon H. O'Dell @ 2006-01-20 16:08 ` jmk 2006-01-20 16:13 ` andrey mirtchovski 2006-01-20 22:19 ` Paweł Lasek 2006-01-20 17:33 ` David Leimbach 1 sibling, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: jmk @ 2006-01-20 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans Compatibility mode? Why? Surely you just recompile the programme for the target machine, you have the source, after all. A minute, tops. --jim On Fri Jan 20 06:59:15 EST 2006, devon.odell@gmail.com wrote: > The specific reason many Linuxes do this is for i386 compat on AMD64 > architectures. It's horribly broken, but is only slightly worse than > the way FreeBSD implements it, which is to have /usr/lib32 > > --Devon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 16:08 ` jmk @ 2006-01-20 16:13 ` andrey mirtchovski 2006-01-20 22:19 ` Paweł Lasek 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: andrey mirtchovski @ 2006-01-20 16:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs On 1/20/06, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com <jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote: > Compatibility mode? Why? Surely you just recompile the programme for > the target machine, you have the source, after all. A minute, tops. > > --jim for a while back then the globus toolkit didn't work in 64-bit mode on the opterons. one needed to compile it 32-bit which meant installing a second set of everything, including the X11 libraries :) on every node. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 16:08 ` jmk 2006-01-20 16:13 ` andrey mirtchovski @ 2006-01-20 22:19 ` Paweł Lasek 2006-01-21 4:01 ` jmk 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Paweł Lasek @ 2006-01-20 22:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs On 1/20/06, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com <jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote: > Compatibility mode? Why? Surely you just recompile the programme for > the target machine, you have the source, after all. A minute, tops. > > --jim It comes from the fact that some of the code is not-so-portable - OpenOffice 1x being popular example (don't know about 2.0), as it didn't compile on amd64 (some bugs in the code, remember, it comes back from StarDivision and OS/2 :D). There's a lot more of it, thaknfully limited mostly to closed-source software. M$ is having the same trouble, having to supply 386 IE for basically every architecture NT is working on (From what I remember, 386 IE is included in Alpha, IA-64 and AMD64 ones) :) -- Paweł Lasek "Once a hitokiri, always a hitokiri. This will never change" - Jine-Ei ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 22:19 ` Paweł Lasek @ 2006-01-21 4:01 ` jmk 2006-01-21 4:06 ` Bruce Ellis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: jmk @ 2006-01-21 4:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans Excuses, excuses. I thought the mantra was "Given enough eyeballs all bugs are shallow"? Maybe they should augment the rooms full of penguins typing code with rooms full of spiders giving it the eight-eyeball lookover. Also, what is behind the eyeballs, the skills can be shallower than the bugs. --jim On Fri Jan 20 17:20:26 EST 2006, pawel.lasek@gmail.com wrote: > On 1/20/06, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com <jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote: > > Compatibility mode? Why? Surely you just recompile the programme for > > the target machine, you have the source, after all. A minute, tops. > > > > --jim > > It comes from the fact that some of the code is not-so-portable - > OpenOffice 1x being popular example (don't know about 2.0), as it > didn't compile on amd64 (some bugs in the code, remember, it comes > back from StarDivision and OS/2 :D). There's a lot more of it, > thaknfully limited mostly to closed-source software. > > M$ is having the same trouble, having to supply 386 IE for basically > every architecture NT is working on (From what I remember, 386 IE is > included in Alpha, IA-64 and AMD64 ones) :) > > > > -- > Paweł Lasek > "Once a hitokiri, always a hitokiri. This will never change" - Jine-Ei On Fri Jan 20 17:20:26 EST 2006, pawel.lasek@gmail.com wrote: > On 1/20/06, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com <jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote: > > Compatibility mode? Why? Surely you just recompile the programme for > > the target machine, you have the source, after all. A minute, tops. > > > > --jim > > It comes from the fact that some of the code is not-so-portable - > OpenOffice 1x being popular example (don't know about 2.0), as it > didn't compile on amd64 (some bugs in the code, remember, it comes > back from StarDivision and OS/2 :D). There's a lot more of it, > thaknfully limited mostly to closed-source software. > > M$ is having the same trouble, having to supply 386 IE for basically > every architecture NT is working on (From what I remember, 386 IE is > included in Alpha, IA-64 and AMD64 ones) :) > > > > -- > Paweł Lasek > "Once a hitokiri, always a hitokiri. This will never change" - Jine-Ei ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 4:01 ` jmk @ 2006-01-21 4:06 ` Bruce Ellis 2006-01-21 4:26 ` erik quanstrom 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Bruce Ellis @ 2006-01-21 4:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs it would certainly be more fun if the a significant amount of open source wasn't open crap. brucee On 1/21/06, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com <jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote: > Excuses, excuses. I thought the mantra was "Given enough > eyeballs all bugs are shallow"? Maybe they should augment the > rooms full of penguins typing code with rooms full of spiders > giving it the eight-eyeball lookover. Also, what is behind > the eyeballs, the skills can be shallower than the bugs. > > --jim > > On Fri Jan 20 17:20:26 EST 2006, pawel.lasek@gmail.com wrote: > > On 1/20/06, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com <jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote: > > > Compatibility mode? Why? Surely you just recompile the programme for > > > the target machine, you have the source, after all. A minute, tops. > > > > > > --jim > > > > It comes from the fact that some of the code is not-so-portable - > > OpenOffice 1x being popular example (don't know about 2.0), as it > > didn't compile on amd64 (some bugs in the code, remember, it comes > > back from StarDivision and OS/2 :D). There's a lot more of it, > > thaknfully limited mostly to closed-source software. > > > > M$ is having the same trouble, having to supply 386 IE for basically > > every architecture NT is working on (From what I remember, 386 IE is > > included in Alpha, IA-64 and AMD64 ones) :) > > > > > > > > -- > > Paweł Lasek > > "Once a hitokiri, always a hitokiri. This will never change" - Jine-Ei > On Fri Jan 20 17:20:26 EST 2006, pawel.lasek@gmail.com wrote: > > On 1/20/06, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com <jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote: > > > Compatibility mode? Why? Surely you just recompile the programme for > > > the target machine, you have the source, after all. A minute, tops. > > > > > > --jim > > > > It comes from the fact that some of the code is not-so-portable - > > OpenOffice 1x being popular example (don't know about 2.0), as it > > didn't compile on amd64 (some bugs in the code, remember, it comes > > back from StarDivision and OS/2 :D). There's a lot more of it, > > thaknfully limited mostly to closed-source software. > > > > M$ is having the same trouble, having to supply 386 IE for basically > > every architecture NT is working on (From what I remember, 386 IE is > > included in Alpha, IA-64 and AMD64 ones) :) > > > > > > > > -- > > Paweł Lasek > > "Once a hitokiri, always a hitokiri. This will never change" - Jine-Ei > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 4:06 ` Bruce Ellis @ 2006-01-21 4:26 ` erik quanstrom 2006-01-21 5:09 ` jmk 2006-01-21 13:11 ` Brantley Coile 0 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: erik quanstrom @ 2006-01-21 4:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans, Bruce Ellis just because you can't see the source, doesn't make it any better. the worst code i ever worked with was icem/ddn, a cad program that was a mixture of fortran, c and c++. complete with holorith data, computed-gotos, overlays, and holorith data. that was also the program, of all that i've worked on, that customers liked most. - erik Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com> writes | | it would certainly be more fun if the a significant amount of | open source wasn't open crap. | | brucee | | On 1/21/06, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com <jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote: | > Excuses, excuses. I thought the mantra was "Given enough | > eyeballs all bugs are shallow"? Maybe they should augment the | > rooms full of penguins typing code with rooms full of spiders | > giving it the eight-eyeball lookover. Also, what is behind | > the eyeballs, the skills can be shallower than the bugs. | > | > --jim | > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 4:26 ` erik quanstrom @ 2006-01-21 5:09 ` jmk 2006-01-21 6:20 ` uriel ` (3 more replies) 2006-01-21 13:11 ` Brantley Coile 1 sibling, 4 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: jmk @ 2006-01-21 5:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans On Fri Jan 20 23:28:05 EST 2006, quanstro@quanstro.net wrote: > just because you can't see the source, doesn't make it any better. > ... > - erik > ... the original point was that it doesn't matter whether you can see the source or not, the effect is the same - failure to deal with complexity results in an inability to simply compile a working programme on new hardware running the same O/S and have it work. instead, hacks are done and baggage is carried around to keep the old binary working. --jim ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 5:09 ` jmk @ 2006-01-21 6:20 ` uriel 2006-01-21 8:36 ` Skip Tavakkolian 2006-01-21 13:09 ` Brantley Coile ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: uriel @ 2006-01-21 6:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans Subject: Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre... From: Alexander Viro (viro@math.psu.edu) To: LKML Date: Sun Apr 21 2002 - 01:27:56 EST Url: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.linux.kernel/msg/caede4c7fd703c4e [...] When it comes to software there are three systems of beliefs. One of them: * Thou shalt know by your heart that all software sucks. * Beware of those who say that their software does not suck, for they are either fools or liars. * Beware of those who give you garments and do not allow to mend them, for sooner or later thou shalt find what needs mending. * But beware also of those who give you badly rotten garments and say "Thou shalt prefer that above everything, for thou art allowed to mend it". * Thou shalt not treat software as a living being, for it is not one. * Choose a license of thine liking for sofware thou writest and do not blame those who choose differently for software they write. * Know when to say "It can be mended, I shalt do that" and when to say "It is rotten beyond repair". * Choose free over non-free when it is better or when thou art willing to fix what is broken. * When shit happens, think how to fix it. Another: * All software wants to be free * Thou shalt not use non-free software * Thou shalt not mention non-free software * Thou shalt make all thine software free * Thou shalt choose free above working, even if free one is broken beyond repair * When shit happens, add new features and the last one: * Our 3133t! K3wl! Software! Does Not Suck!!! * Always choose our software above everything else * When shit happens, we add new features If you happen to believe in second variant, you have my condolence as long as you don't force your beliefs on everybody else. If you choose to emulate door-to-door pests^H^H^H^Hreachers - don't expect to be treated differently. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 6:20 ` uriel @ 2006-01-21 8:36 ` Skip Tavakkolian 2006-01-21 7:42 ` Bruce Ellis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Skip Tavakkolian @ 2006-01-21 8:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans > * Our 3133t! K3wl! Software! Does Not Suck!!! > * Always choose our software above everything else > * When shit happens, we add new features some open source projects remind me of public swimming pools in the middle of summer: noisy, full of kids and not hygienic; the kids however, think it's k3wl. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 8:36 ` Skip Tavakkolian @ 2006-01-21 7:42 ` Bruce Ellis 0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Bruce Ellis @ 2006-01-21 7:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs i think ken said "open sewer" at one stage. brucee On 1/21/06, Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com> wrote: > > * Our 3133t! K3wl! Software! Does Not Suck!!! > > * Always choose our software above everything else > > * When shit happens, we add new features > > some open source projects remind me of public swimming pools > in the middle of summer: noisy, full of kids and not hygienic; the kids > however, think it's k3wl. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 5:09 ` jmk 2006-01-21 6:20 ` uriel @ 2006-01-21 13:09 ` Brantley Coile 2006-01-21 16:37 ` Ronald G. Minnich 2006-01-21 19:43 ` David Leimbach 3 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Brantley Coile @ 2006-01-21 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans And a sufficient quantity of bad source is the same, or worse, than no source at all. > On Fri Jan 20 23:28:05 EST 2006, quanstro@quanstro.net wrote: >> just because you can't see the source, doesn't make it any better. >> ... >> - erik >> ... > > the original point was that it doesn't matter whether you can > see the source or not, the effect is the same - failure to deal > with complexity results in an inability to simply compile a > working programme on new hardware running the same O/S and have > it work. instead, hacks are done and baggage is carried around > to keep the old binary working. > > --jim ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 5:09 ` jmk 2006-01-21 6:20 ` uriel 2006-01-21 13:09 ` Brantley Coile @ 2006-01-21 16:37 ` Ronald G. Minnich 2006-01-21 18:49 ` Bruce Ellis 2006-01-21 19:43 ` David Leimbach 3 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Ronald G. Minnich @ 2006-01-21 16:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs; +Cc: 9fans > the original point was that it doesn't matter whether you can > see the source or not, the effect is the same - failure to deal > with complexity results in an inability to simply compile a > working programme on new hardware running the same O/S and have > it work. instead, hacks are done and baggage is carried around > to keep the old binary working. > it's even worse than that, because people learn from the bad code. We're raising a whole generation of people who think awful stuff is how it's done ... ron ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 16:37 ` Ronald G. Minnich @ 2006-01-21 18:49 ` Bruce Ellis 0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Bruce Ellis @ 2006-01-21 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: rminnich, Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs anyone who has thought "i wonder how linux does this" will have gone through all the layers of misguided inexperience. brucee On 1/22/06, Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov> wrote: > > > the original point was that it doesn't matter whether you can > > see the source or not, the effect is the same - failure to deal > > with complexity results in an inability to simply compile a > > working programme on new hardware running the same O/S and have > > it work. instead, hacks are done and baggage is carried around > > to keep the old binary working. > > > > it's even worse than that, because people learn from the bad code. We're > raising a whole generation of people who think awful stuff is how it's > done ... > > ron > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 5:09 ` jmk ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2006-01-21 16:37 ` Ronald G. Minnich @ 2006-01-21 19:43 ` David Leimbach 2006-01-21 21:13 ` Skip Tavakkolian 3 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: David Leimbach @ 2006-01-21 19:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs On 1/20/06, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com <jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote: > On Fri Jan 20 23:28:05 EST 2006, quanstro@quanstro.net wrote: > > just because you can't see the source, doesn't make it any better. > > ... > > - erik > > ... > > the original point was that it doesn't matter whether you can > see the source or not, the effect is the same - failure to deal > with complexity results in an inability to simply compile a > working programme on new hardware running the same O/S and have > it work. instead, hacks are done and baggage is carried around > to keep the old binary working. Yep, anyone who's ever tried to use FreeBSD ports on x86-64 platforms as 64bit applications. Totally not worth the aggravation... At least not if you don't have to, I was just curious one day. Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 19:43 ` David Leimbach @ 2006-01-21 21:13 ` Skip Tavakkolian 0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Skip Tavakkolian @ 2006-01-21 21:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans >> the original point was that it doesn't matter whether you can >> see the source or not, the effect is the same - failure to deal >> with complexity results in an inability to simply compile a >> working programme on new hardware running the same O/S and have >> it work. instead, hacks are done and baggage is carried around >> to keep the old binary working. > > Yep, anyone who's ever tried to use FreeBSD ports on x86-64 platforms > as 64bit applications. wouldn't a VM be a viable option, since we're talking about one processor family? those cantankerous applications, that don't port easily, can be run under qemu/xen/etc. with appropriate os. everything old is new again. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-21 4:26 ` erik quanstrom 2006-01-21 5:09 ` jmk @ 2006-01-21 13:11 ` Brantley Coile 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Brantley Coile @ 2006-01-21 13:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans > that was also the program, of all that i've worked on, that > customers liked most. I guess some sort of usefullness is why X windows still lives. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 11:58 ` Devon H. O'Dell 2006-01-20 16:08 ` jmk @ 2006-01-20 17:33 ` David Leimbach 2006-01-20 17:36 ` Ronald G Minnich 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: David Leimbach @ 2006-01-20 17:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs On 1/20/06, Devon H. O'Dell <devon.odell@gmail.com> wrote: > The specific reason many Linuxes do this is for i386 compat on AMD64 > architectures. It's horribly broken, but is only slightly worse than > the way FreeBSD implements it, which is to have /usr/lib32 > > --Devon > Funny, the linux distros I've used have "/usr/lib64" SUSE was one that used this, but then again, I must admit, I don't use linux anywhere near as much as I used to. Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 17:33 ` David Leimbach @ 2006-01-20 17:36 ` Ronald G Minnich 2006-01-20 17:53 ` jmk 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Ronald G Minnich @ 2006-01-20 17:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs David Leimbach wrote: > On 1/20/06, Devon H. O'Dell <devon.odell@gmail.com> wrote: > >>The specific reason many Linuxes do this is for i386 compat on AMD64 >>architectures. It's horribly broken, but is only slightly worse than >>the way FreeBSD implements it, which is to have /usr/lib32 >> >>--Devon >> > > > Funny, the linux distros I've used have "/usr/lib64" SUSE was one > that used this, but then again, I must admit, I don't use linux > anywhere near as much as I used to. > /usr/lib64 &tc. is very, very common linuxices. I would prefer /usr/lib32. recompilation is not a common option on linux, which has tons of something we don't see much on plan 9: third party software. ron ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 17:36 ` Ronald G Minnich @ 2006-01-20 17:53 ` jmk 2006-01-20 18:10 ` Dave Lukes 2006-01-20 20:14 ` Ronald G Minnich 0 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: jmk @ 2006-01-20 17:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans On Fri Jan 20 12:42:42 EST 2006, rminnich@lanl.gov wrote: > > recompilation is not a common option on linux, which has tons of > something we don't see much on plan 9: third party software. > > ron That sounds a lot like Windows - "I got this code from somewhere else and it's too difficult/awkward or impossible to move it to my new system so I will carry the baggage around forever". So there's no free freedom after all? --jim ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 17:53 ` jmk @ 2006-01-20 18:10 ` Dave Lukes 2006-01-20 18:38 ` Lyndon Nerenberg 2006-01-21 19:29 ` Marina Brown 2006-01-20 20:14 ` Ronald G Minnich 1 sibling, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Dave Lukes @ 2006-01-20 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs > So there's no free freedom after all? > > --jim "The price of freedom is eternal memory upgrades". An aside: I also find it slightly ironic that, out of all the free/open/whatever licenses, the FSF's is probably the most restrictive, due to the encumbrances it places on it's victims^h^h^h^h^h^h^husers. What *I* want is a s/w licence which says something like: "You can do whatever you want with this except tell lies about it". DaveL ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 18:10 ` Dave Lukes @ 2006-01-20 18:38 ` Lyndon Nerenberg 2006-01-21 19:29 ` Marina Brown 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Lyndon Nerenberg @ 2006-01-20 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 | What *I* want is a s/w licence which says something like: | "You can do whatever you want with this except tell lies about it". You just described the three-clause BSD license. - --lyndon -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFD0S4lSoWjgnL/KRcRAnFAAJ4pSKsaj4qLHZLAP9Y7C0unGMcOwwCfeShT IOK91i3+qVGsI+x3k9+pfuQ= =sALL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 18:10 ` Dave Lukes 2006-01-20 18:38 ` Lyndon Nerenberg @ 2006-01-21 19:29 ` Marina Brown 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Marina Brown @ 2006-01-21 19:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs Dave Lukes wrote: > > So there's no free freedom after all? > > > > --jim > > "The price of freedom is eternal memory upgrades". > > An aside: > I also find it slightly ironic that, > out of all the free/open/whatever licenses, > the FSF's is probably the most restrictive, > due to the encumbrances it places on it's victims^h^h^h^h^h^h^husers. > > What *I* want is a s/w licence which says something like: > "You can do whatever you want with this except tell lies about it". > > DaveL > > I've been a fan of the BSD licenses. They are so simple and free. -- Marina Brown ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all ... 2006-01-20 17:53 ` jmk 2006-01-20 18:10 ` Dave Lukes @ 2006-01-20 20:14 ` Ronald G Minnich 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Ronald G Minnich @ 2006-01-20 20:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote: > That sounds a lot like Windows - "I got this code from somewhere else > and it's too difficult/awkward or impossible to move it to my new system > so I will carry the baggage around forever". > > So there's no free freedom after all? yep. By 3rd party software I mean stuff like compilers, libraries, CAD tools, and so on. It's going to be a while before it's all 64-bit for linux, I would guess. And, seeing the stuff that they do in gnu* nowadays, that's hardly surprising. I mean, ld scripts where a .so should be? holy mackeral. ron ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-01-21 21:13 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 27+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2006-01-19 17:54 [9fans] Maybe it is april fool's after all Ronald G Minnich 2006-01-19 20:43 ` Charles Forsyth 2006-01-19 22:28 ` Bruce Ellis 2006-01-20 11:58 ` Devon H. O'Dell 2006-01-20 16:08 ` jmk 2006-01-20 16:13 ` andrey mirtchovski 2006-01-20 22:19 ` Paweł Lasek 2006-01-21 4:01 ` jmk 2006-01-21 4:06 ` Bruce Ellis 2006-01-21 4:26 ` erik quanstrom 2006-01-21 5:09 ` jmk 2006-01-21 6:20 ` uriel 2006-01-21 8:36 ` Skip Tavakkolian 2006-01-21 7:42 ` Bruce Ellis 2006-01-21 13:09 ` Brantley Coile 2006-01-21 16:37 ` Ronald G. Minnich 2006-01-21 18:49 ` Bruce Ellis 2006-01-21 19:43 ` David Leimbach 2006-01-21 21:13 ` Skip Tavakkolian 2006-01-21 13:11 ` Brantley Coile 2006-01-20 17:33 ` David Leimbach 2006-01-20 17:36 ` Ronald G Minnich 2006-01-20 17:53 ` jmk 2006-01-20 18:10 ` Dave Lukes 2006-01-20 18:38 ` Lyndon Nerenberg 2006-01-21 19:29 ` Marina Brown 2006-01-20 20:14 ` Ronald G Minnich
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).