Re: Why I wanted Sven to fuck himself (Was: Care to comment on plan for module building?)
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 07:49:24PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 18:45:30 +0100
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
> > I still don't get why Jonas so suddenly took of with you and told me
> > to go fuck myself
>
> Let me illustrate through quoting IRC, since you seem to prefer that:
No, this is no excuse to being rude. I don't know, maybe you speak another
kind of english than me, or have some other cultural bias against this kind of
language, but i am seriously offended.
> This is what directly led to my insulting you:
>
> 12:09 < jonas> svenl: Can we please focus on the topic?
> 12:10 < jonas> svenl: When who did (not) do what is irrelevant
> 12:10 < jonas> svenl: when what did (not) work is more interesting
> 12:10 < svenl> jonas: there is nothing to focus, Manoj is going to
> either dictate his stuff unto us or we are going to drop k-p, there is
> no middle way possible. 12:11 < jonas> svenl: End of discussion then.
Upto here, well it was normal you have the right to your opinion as i do to
mine.
> Go fuck yourself. Hard!
This on the other hand was severly misplaced and i expect apologizes from your
part, not justifying yourself like you did above.
> So why am I that rude suddently, you ask? Well, let's go a little back
> and find out why I asked you to change focus:
>
> 11:40 < Manoj> and kernel package ensure that /lib/modules/$(uname
> - -r)/build always works 11:41 < svenl> Manoj: except for official kernel
> packages, riught ? 11:41 < Manoj> whether you have installed a kernel
> image on the local machine, or just have a kernel headers installed,
> k-p packages always ensure that /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/build works.
> 11:41 < jonas> so how to run a kernel without installing it? 11:41 <
> Manoj> even for official kernels 11:41 < svenl> Manoj: not for official
> Manoj> kernels. 11:41 < svenl> Manoj: since you are out to break it.
> 11:41 < Manoj> no matter what, /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/build always
> works 11:41 < Manoj> svenl: grow up, and get a clue.
> ..
> 11:42 * svenl ignores Manoj.
Well, i may have gotten out of hand with Manoj and insisted too much, but in
no way have i been incorect and insulting, the worse i said was that Manoj was
stubborn, even saying that it was not necessarily a bad thing. This is no
excuse for bad-wording me like above, and i cannot work further with you like
this.
> Why on earth do you repeat yourself instead of clarify _why_ you
> believe Manoj makes exceptions regarding official kernels when he
> himself claims it "always works"?
Because the above was lead up by over a day of email exchanges here, where i
argued my point, provided reasonabable arguments, which where taken again by
folk like hch, willy or fjp this evening if i remember well, and Manoj did not
give any single real argument apart from the "i have been doing this since 96
and it will stay so". Also, you where not there when he pissed off lennert in
the most ugly way when he dared say he agreed with me.
> Ok, so Manoj gives up on you and calls you childish. I agree that your
> discussion technique is indeed childish.
And his is not ? I don't understand why you picked me out for your insults,
while Manoj did nothing different, and even worse never gave a single argument
when asked, and resorted to insults. I think your discernement is lacking on
this, but then given the way you insulted me, i guess i should not have
wondered why you sided with Manoj on this. Someone is insulting someone else,
so let's join the bully.
> (if Manoj would have reason to believe that you did not understand that
> "uname -r" implies "works only on running kernel", then I would call
> his discussion technique mean - but I do not have reason to believe so)
This claim alone is prove that you have no understanding of the situation. We
never argued about the uname -r, but about the build symlink. Sure, you can
get the version number with uname -r, but if you are not running the kernel,
you obvisouly need to know the version you want to build modules for, so where
is the problem.
This is obtained in official kernels by the flavours file, and even
kernel-package passes this info to the dir.d scripts so you could envisage
building modules at kernel install time just fine.
So, you had no clue, you saw him insulting me, you decided to join.
And just to be curious, can you please cite a single technical argument by
Manoj ? I saw no such thing.
Sven Luther
>
>
> Well well - let's continue...
>
> 11:42 < jonas> svenl: Do you ignore me as well?
> 11:42 < svenl> nope, you did not insult me like Manoj did.
> 11:42 < jonas> svenl: then talk with me, and _do_ ignore Manoj as you
> claim to do :-P ..
> 11:43 < jonas> svenl: oh - and talk with me about the topic, _not_
> about Manoj!
>
> Here I ask you to stick to the technical topic and not get personal.
>
> Have a look back - even further back than quoted here, if you still
> have the backlog around - and check out how frequently you get
> personal in the discussion compared to Manoj.
>
> 11:45 < svenl> jonas: well, what is there to say ? we right now have
> the build symlink correctly set, it worked for the past 6 month, and we
> where almost ready to push for the proposal, and the new k-p wants to
> break it all for no reason. .. 11:47 < jonas> svenl: Define "symlink
> correctly set" - there seem to be some confusion about what that is...
>
> You obviously do not want to play along. I try dig into the technical
> part, but...
>
>
> 11:55 < svenl> jonas: [..explanation..] Manoj wants to break this.
> 11:56 < svenl> jonas: and have all users and third party module
> packages do the KSRC thingy.
>
> ...you insist on throwing accusations.
>
> You seem to see KSRC as being a pet thing for Manoj, so throws that at
> him (through answering me). Thing is, using KSRC is not "Manoj fanatism"
> but a sane way to go beyond building modules for the running kernel,
> so...
>
>
> 11:56 < Manoj> no, it wont just work. You have to set KSRC
> 11:56 < Manoj> and you can just set KSRC in my scheme to, no additional
> work, and everything just works 11:56 < Manoj> see, if you do not have
> the image isntalled, the uname -r trick does not work 11:57 < Manoj>
> so, again, it is KSRC=/lib/modules/fo vs
> KSRC=/usr/src/linux-headers-foo 11:57 < Manoj> What is the damned
> difference?
>
> Have a look at that. Even persistently provoced Manoj manages to stay
> technical for several lines before slipping in a single "damned"...
>
>
> 11:58 < svenl> Manoj: so why are you being so stuborn about it ?
> 11:59 < svenl> Just do it, we have been doing it for over 6 month now,
> why didn't you complain back then ? 11:59 < svenl> this was amply and
> publicly discussed.
>
> You bring no technical arguments on the table...
>
> 11:59 < Manoj> since doing it my way, rather than a dance in the
> postinst, requires far less code, and less code that can develop bugs
> 12:00 < Manoj> the way it stands, we have a clean, working, tested
> solution, since kernel-package has had this behaviour forever 12:00 <
> Manoj> I want less code, not more code
>
> ...Manoj tries again...
>
> 12:02 < svenl> Manoj: k-p and clean code are not something i would
> mention in the same sentence.
>
> ...and again you provoke...
>
> 12:04 < Manoj> yeah, with your level of technical expertise, I would
> expect no less 12:04 < jonas> svenl: The argument of "we have been
> doing it for 6 months now" sounds odd compared to "the same as it has
> been since 1996" 12:05 < svenl> jonas: well, but do you know that
> previous to 6 month ago, the build symlinks was broken on 9/11 of all
> arches around, and building modules for non-x86 was an horrible mess ?
> 12:05 < Manoj> not for packages created by k-p 12:06 < jonas> svenl:
> using KSRC? .. 12:08 < jonas> possibly it has been a mess to build
> without setting KSRC 12:08 < svenl> jonas: the build symlink was a
> dangling symlink for much of sarge's live time, and Manoj didn't even
> care to notice. .. 12:08 < jonas> svenl: care?
>
>
> ...and then we are at the quote that directly led to my insulting you.
>
>
> Hope that clarified things, Sven. If not, then just forget about it (or
> remember it eternally if you so desire).
>
>
> Have a nice evening/morning/whatever everyone :-)
>
> - Jonas
>
> - --
> * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
> * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
>
> - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFDb6G0n7DbMsAkQLgRAtnqAKCLS+0ZE22KTe+0LSIjdPmYeybY8ACfS7fB
> Esk2z7zhQ34zVx2Lk3Ty9SE=
> =/3ak
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Wanadoo vous informe que cet e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail.
> Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.
>
>
>
Reply to: