Re: What demotivates debian-arm? [Was: Re: Bug#425011: gcc-4.1: FTBFS on m68k and arm, multiple definitions of ffi_prep_closure]
Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
What I wrote was:
The regular ARM port isn't in very good shape at all, and
there is no indication that armeb or armel would end up doing
any better.
I.e., regardless of the technical merits of the port, there is no
indication that the current problems in the old-ABI port are suddenly
going to disappear once/if we switch to EABI (if ever.)
... problems that you still haven't enumerated in any quantifiable way.
But by now, this is probably not the best thread for that. :)
I'm not saying that your business absolutely depends on it, but being
able to take a set of prebuilt, QA'd binary packages and use those
does save time over having to compile everything manually, so it's not
that the value of Debian is zero to you.
Agreed. Which is why I support it as best I can. As I invest in
Debian, Debian gives back to me--- and to others. I now have
half-a-dozen clients who are using it one capacity or another, and some
of the developers on those projects have expressed an interest in
becoming more involved in Debian maintenance and improvement. I don't
keep tabs on them, for all I know they're major contributors by now. Or
perhaps not. Dunno.
If you would be using, say, OpenEmbedded in your consulting business,
would you (considering that you are so very very busy working very
hard to make sure that you and your family get by that you can't write
a simple 5-minute patch without a PO to cover for it) still be writing
a long email on the debian-arm@ mailing list arguing that Debian should
not drop their ARM port?
Show me a patch that can be investigated and resolved by a mere Debian
user in only 5 minutes. :) Despite my efforts, I'm still not the
power-user that you are. Things take longer than that for most of us.
And I _never_ said that it would require a P.O. for me to release a
5-minute patch--- or any patch, for that matter--- because it isn't true.
Not saying anything about your statement, I disagree with the
assertion that all the debian-arm port needs is a little bit of
commercial attention, i.e. that the success of the port depends
on external factors.
I said:
1. Debian-arm could benefit from some focused attention.
2. One way to get that focus is by making it someone's job.
And I also said this:
3. I wouldn't mind it if debian-arm maintenance was my job.
"Debian has no value to me.", I think we've already asserted that
that is not true.
How about:
"Take Linux away, and I'll just go back to using *BSD. Linux will
become irrelevant to me, and I'll apply my time, skills, hardware
and other resources somewhere else. It's that simple, and I won't
lose any sleep over it."
Or:
"Take the IT industry away, and I'll just go back to herding sheep.
Computers will become irrelevant to me, and I'll apply my time,
skills, hardware and other resources somewhere else. It's that
simple, and I won't lose any sleep over it."
You're taking this to a ridiculous extreme, and I won't follow you there
except to note that I did in fact grow up on a farm (cows, not sheep),
and the possibility of returning to that lifestyle is one that I find
appealing on certain days. :)
That's a red herring. A lot of people have day jobs and get along
just fine answering a question here and there on some mailing list
here and there.
And kudos to them! But I wasn't talking about "answering a question
here and there".
I _would_ object against the (purely hypothetical) case where Bill
Gatliff would get a PO to implement a feature X and then sends Lennert
email saying "What is feature X? How do I implement it? Can you do
it for me? This week? Thanks!"
And I would too! But now we've both asserted that that's a purely
hypothetical case, so there's no point continuing to discuss it in this
thread.
So if the guy who pimps his consulting business at every possible
opportunity (BTW, do you know I have a consulting business?) posts to
the linux-arm-kernel@ mailing list saying something like "Before I
dig into it, has anyone seen problems with $FOO?", I really do start
to wonder.
Yes, I know you have a consulting business too.
Presumably he's being paid to make $FOO work, which means that he
does have time to spend on it, but before spending any time on it
himself, he'd rather check first whether he can find someone else
to fix the issue for him.
Personally, in such cases, I just use the 'D' key.
... as you are free to do. And please continue to do so, as it suits
you. Doesn't offend me at all, really.
Yes, I do post on l-a-k as well. And yes, I do ask if someone has made
progress on something before I dig into it myself. Because there's no
point wasting time reinventing someone else's wheel. I'm pretty
confident that the l-a-k archives will reflect that.
Here's an interesting thing to note about that. If someone else _has_
fixed an issue, then there's no way I can bill hours to a client to fix
(again) it myself. So really, I'd be better off financially to not ask
those questions in the first place.
Yeah, I know, Bill Gatliff would like to give back more, but he
can't, because he's working day and night to keep his family fed.
Yea, actually that pretty much sums it up. Call me a "pimp", then.
(But purchase orders are welcome, I take it.)
Indeed. Especially ones that let me spend more time working with Debian.
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
bgat@billgatliff.com
Reply to: