Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[unobe]

Maybe opcode 0x86 was eighty-sixed intentionally.

[9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Jacob Moody]

On 10/23/23 16:05, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
> Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86.

What is the context here? What are you trying to do?

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 17:14, Jacob Moody wrote:
> On 10/23/23 16:05, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>> Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86.
> 
> What is the context here? What are you trying to do?
> 
My machine's battery is not detected by aux/acpi, meaning that 
/dev/battery never shows up, meaning that neither bar nor stats can show 
what is a critical piece of information.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[B. Atticus Grobe]

On 10/23/23 16:48, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
> On 10/23/23 17:14, Jacob Moody wrote:
>> On 10/23/23 16:05, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>>> Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86.
>>
>> What is the context here? What are you trying to do?
>>
> My machine's battery is not detected by aux/acpi, meaning that 
> /dev/battery never shows up, meaning that neither bar nor stats can show 
> what is a critical piece of information.

what machine? model number? manufacturer? the output of sysinfo as run 
by the hostowner?

you've provided no actionable information whatsoever. if you're going to 
make a bug report, include the above information as well as any error 
messages and contextual information in the first place so people don't 
have to waste their time playing twenty questions.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 18:04, B. Atticus Grobe wrote:
> […]
> you've provided no actionable information whatsoever. […]
I have provided exactly the information necessary.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[ori]

Quoth Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com>:
> On 10/23/23 18:04, B. Atticus Grobe wrote:
> > […]
> > you've provided no actionable information whatsoever. […]
> I have provided exactly the information necessary.

you may have forgotten an attachment. The only
thing arrived was one line of text:

	"Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86."

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 19:54, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> you may have forgotten an attachment.
No.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[ori]

Quoth Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com>:
> On 10/23/23 19:54, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> > you may have forgotten an attachment.
> No.

Ah. Well then.

I am wearing a blue shirt today.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Kurt H Maier]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 08:52:22PM -0400, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> Quoth Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com>:
> > On 10/23/23 19:54, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> > > you may have forgotten an attachment.
> > No.
> 
> Ah. Well then.
> 
> I am wearing a blue shirt today.
> 

Good.

khm

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[ori]

Quoth Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com>:
> Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86.

You appear to be stating a fact. This fact doesn't
seem very useful in isolation.

https://www.mikeash.com/getting_answers.html

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Kurt H Maier]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 05:05:57PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
> Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86.

Good.

khm

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 20:38, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 05:05:57PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>> Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86.
> 
> Good.
> […]Why?

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Michael Misch]

Another fun fact is that no one on this list is paid, really ever to do the service thing. just a bunch of folks helping out because they like 9front and have the skills. Pretty neat! And if you want help, the low-effort, “Should be obvious” schtick you’re pulling will get you exactly ignored, because no one is paid to put up with it.

> On Oct 23, 2023, at 6:03 PM, Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 10/23/23 20:38, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 05:05:57PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>>> Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86.
>> Good.
>> […]Why?

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 21:07, Michael Misch wrote:
> Another fun fact is that no one on this list is paid, really ever to do the service thing. just a bunch of folks helping out because they like 9front and have the skills. Pretty neat! And if you want help, the low-effort, “Should be obvious” schtick you’re pulling will get you exactly ignored, because no one is paid to put up with it.
> 
>> On Oct 23, 2023, at 6:03 PM, Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 10/23/23 20:38, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 05:05:57PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>>>> Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86.
>>> Good.
>>> […]Why?
I made no insistence that it “should be obvious”.  Contrary to your 
claim of loweffortness, I _did_ make an effort, that being to include 
only the needed information.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Kurt H Maier]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 09:18:52PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
> I made no insistence that it “should be obvious”.  Contrary to your claim of
> loweffortness, I _did_ make an effort, that being to include only the needed
> information.

You forgot to include any information supporting the implicit assumption
that people on this mailing list should give a shit that libaml does not
recognize opcode 0x86.  You have still failed to include any information
which would enable someone, in the event they unilaterally decided to
give a shit anyway, to do anything useful with the information you have
so inexpertly provided.

In other words, you are not qualified to ascertain what information is
needed, and you did it wrong.  For this, and many other reasons, I am
glad you can't get a battery readout on your (likely stolen) computer.

khm

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 22:38, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 09:18:52PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>> I made no insistence that it “should be obvious”.  Contrary to your claim of
>> loweffortness, I _did_ make an effort, that being to include only the needed
>> information.
> 
> You forgot to include any information supporting the implicit assumption
> that people on this mailing list should give a shit that libaml does not
> recognize opcode 0x86.

Okay:  it prevents batteries from being recognized as existing.  Works 
that for you?

>                         You have still failed to include any information
> which would enable someone, in the event they unilaterally decided to
> give a shit anyway, to do anything useful with the information you have
> so inexpertly provided.

I seen't what info'd be necessary.  Please clarify.

> In other words, you are not qualified to ascertain what information is
> needed, and you did it wrong.  For this, and many other reasons, I am
> glad you can't get a battery readout on your (likely stolen) computer.

That accusation of theft seems to me completely out of left field. 
Where on earth did you get it from?

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Kurt H Maier]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 11:00:33PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
> Okay:  it prevents batteries from being recognized as existing.  Works that
> for you?

No.  Include a link to sysinfo output from the affected machine.

> I seen't what info'd be necessary.  Please clarify.

Your English is as bad as your problem-solving capacity.

> That accusation of theft seems to me completely out of left field. Where on
> earth did you get it from?

If only more people would ask you questions like that; whoever
orignially bought that computer might still have it.

khm

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Ellenor Bjornsdottir]

Doubling down on the accusations of theft, squirt?

On 10/24/23 03:18, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 11:00:33PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>> Okay:  it prevents batteries from being recognized as existing.  Works that
>> for you?
> No.  Include a link to sysinfo output from the affected machine.
>
>> I seen't what info'd be necessary.  Please clarify.
> Your English is as bad as your problem-solving capacity.
>
>> That accusation of theft seems to me completely out of left field. Where on
>> earth did you get it from?
> If only more people would ask you questions like that; whoever
> orignially bought that computer might still have it.
>
> khm

-- 
Ellenor Agnes Bjornsdottir (she)
sysadmin umbrellix.net
jabber: ellenor ~on~ umbrellix.net

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Kurt H Maier]

On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 03:26:30AM +0000, Ellenor Bjornsdottir wrote:
> Doubling down on the accusations of theft, squirt?

Attempting to bribe me with grapefruit-flavored soft drinks will not
divert me from solving this crime.

khm

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 23:18, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 11:00:33PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>> Okay:  it prevents batteries from being recognized as existing.  Works that
>> for you?
> 
> No.  Include a link to sysinfo output from the affected machine.
> I seen't how that justifies of the problem itself caring, of which to 
which your statement in reference to was.
>> I seen't what info'd be necessary.  Please clarify.
> 
> Your English is as bad as your problem-solving capacity.
> 
If you, as an english speaker, can parse that sentence, it is a valid 
english sentence.  Back on topic, that does not clarify.
>> That accusation of theft seems to me completely out of left field. Where on
>> earth did you get it from?
> 
> If only more people would ask you questions like that; whoever
> orignially bought that computer might still have it.
Ah, i see what you're trying to do there now.  You're not going to 
succeed in it.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Kurt H Maier]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 11:32:20PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
> > I seen't how that justifies of the problem itself caring, of which to
> which your statement in reference to was.

You're an idiot, then.  If your machine is worth supporting, people will
care.  Sysinfo output is the easiest way to make that determination.
Once again, you're not qualified to identify which information is
relevant.

> If you, as an english speaker, can parse that sentence, it is a valid
> english sentence.  Back on topic, that does not clarify.

Plenty of valid English sentences are shit.  Most of yours have been.

> Ah, i see what you're trying to do there now.  You're not going to succeed
> in it.

I strongly recommend you return any stolen property as quickly as
possible.  

khm

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 23:37, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 11:32:20PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>>> I seen't how that justifies of the problem itself caring, of which to
>> which your statement in reference to was.
> 
> You're an idiot, then.
Rude.
>                         If your machine is worth supporting, people will
> care.
This problem'sn't unique particularly to this machine.  'Tis of the lib. 
  'Tis general.
>        Sysinfo output is the easiest way to make that determination.
> Once again, you're not qualified to identify which information is
> relevant.
> 
If of this so certain you're, explain why should also you be, no?
>> If you, as an english speaker, can parse that sentence, it is a valid
>> english sentence.  Back on topic, that does not clarify.
> 
> Plenty of valid English sentences are shit.  Most of yours have been.
> 
'Tisn't but m'dialect, man.
>> Ah, i see what you're trying to do there now.  You're not going to succeed
>> in it.
> 
> I strongly recommend you return any stolen property as quickly as
> possible.
I plead the fifth.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[unobe]

Quoth Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com>:
> On 10/23/23 23:37, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> 'Tisn't but m'dialect, man.

More like an idiolect (that's a technical term, related etymologically
to idiot and idiosyncrasy).  We all of them.  But the way you're
writing now compared to your initial writing makes me think you're
just digging in heels, feeling attacked.  If you want some help with
the 0x86, you can follow the advice Ori posted.  Give more context.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Lucas Francesco]

This bug report is wrong and your communication skills suck. libaml
does RECOGNIZE opcode 0x86 (NotifyOP, I recommend you to check up
Onotify in optab[]), and that's generally unrelated to battery
handling AFAIK, you may be referring to DefNotify, which is defined
as:  "DefNotify := NotifyOp NotifyObject NotifyValue". There's no
documented need for DefNotify and nobody would implement it because of
some random person just pointing at it without even bringing up an
actual bug.


On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 00:54, Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/23/23 23:37, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 11:32:20PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
> >>> I seen't how that justifies of the problem itself caring, of which to
> >> which your statement in reference to was.
> >
> > You're an idiot, then.
> Rude.
> >                         If your machine is worth supporting, people will
> > care.
> This problem'sn't unique particularly to this machine.  'Tis of the lib.
>   'Tis general.
> >        Sysinfo output is the easiest way to make that determination.
> > Once again, you're not qualified to identify which information is
> > relevant.
> >
> If of this so certain you're, explain why should also you be, no?
> >> If you, as an english speaker, can parse that sentence, it is a valid
> >> english sentence.  Back on topic, that does not clarify.
> >
> > Plenty of valid English sentences are shit.  Most of yours have been.
> >
> 'Tisn't but m'dialect, man.
> >> Ah, i see what you're trying to do there now.  You're not going to succeed
> >> in it.
> >
> > I strongly recommend you return any stolen property as quickly as
> > possible.
> I plead the fifth.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Ellenor Bjornsdottir]

"(likely stolen)"

Kurt: Is that really where we're going? I'll have you know that that may 
qualify as libel if false.

Hawk: get a lawyer. In the meantime, what model of laptop do you have? 
This is important if you want anyone to help you get a battery readout.

Le 24 octobre 2023 02:38:01 UTC, Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net> a écrit :
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 09:18:52PM -0400, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>> I made no insistence that it “should be obvious”.  Contrary to your claim of
>> loweffortness, I _did_ make an effort, that being to include only the needed
>> information.
>
> You forgot to include any information supporting the implicit assumption
> that people on this mailing list should give a shit that libaml does not
> recognize opcode 0x86.  You have still failed to include any information
> which would enable someone, in the event they unilaterally decided to
> give a shit anyway, to do anything useful with the information you have
> so inexpertly provided.
>
> In other words, you are not qualified to ascertain what information is
> needed, and you did it wrong.  For this, and many other reasons, I am
> glad you can't get a battery readout on your (likely stolen) computer.
>
> khm

-- 
Ellenor Bjornsdottir (she)
sysadmin umbrellix.net

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Kurt H Maier]

On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 03:16:53AM +0000, Ellenor Bjornsdottir wrote:
> "(likely stolen)"
> 
> Kurt: Is that really where we're going? I'll have you know that that may
> qualify as libel if false.

Key words:  "if false."  Are you claiming to have knowledge of this
possible crime, or do you merely defend potential criminals as a hobby?
If someone is stealing laptops, and someone knows something about it,
but chooses to defend the thief, that person might be an accessory to
the crime.  

> Hawk: get a lawyer. In the meantime, what model of laptop do you have? This
> is important if you want anyone to help you get a battery readout.

A lawyer might get a thief out of their just punishment, but that won't
restore the stolen property to its rightful owner.  A sysinfo readout
would be more useful, here, than a lawyer.  Preferably a serial number
as well, so we can check with the police to see if it's been reported
stolen.

khm

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 23:23, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> A lawyer might get a thief out of their just punishment,[…]
There'sn't any such thing.  All punitive criminal justice systems fail 
in their supposed goal of crime prevention.

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[B. Atticus Grobe]

you can take the moron out of school, but he'll take the computers with 
him...

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

On 10/23/23 23:43, B. Atticus Grobe wrote:
> you can take the moron out of school, but he'll take the computers with 
> him...
?

Re: [9front] Libaml does not recognize opcode 0x86

[hiro]

On 10/24/23, B. Atticus Grobe <grobe0ba@tcp80.org> wrote:
> you can take the moron out of school, but he'll take the computers with
> him...
>

i strongly object here: there is not a person more worthy of schooling than
the Idiot.