[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de: Re: RFD : libg++/gcc/egcs upgrades needed for libc6 (READ ME)]

>>>>> "Goswin" == Brederlow <goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:

Goswin> Galen Hazelwood <galenh@micron.net> writes:

> (James--I am cc'ing this to debian-devel.  Hope you don't mind...)
> James Troup wrote:
> > Welp, I'll start a discussion about it on debian-68k and with Andreas
> > and see what he says.  However, Jes (head m68k kernel blokey, and
> > single-handed creator of Redhat-m68k (in like 1/12 of the time it's
> > taken Debian/m68k to get where it is)), has publicly stated that "a
> > distribution compiling things with egcs is broken".  :-(

I didn't really want to get involved in this discussion as my comment on
gcc/egcs was primarily meant for Linux/m68k compiling. I still consider
it valid for other architectures though, at least until the respective
architeture maintainers states something else. As some of you might have
noticed, Linus made a comment about the use of gcc/egcs on linux-kernel
a few days ago, which you might also want to take into consideration.

However, this comment from Goswin seriously upset me, so I think I
better make things a bit clear, as I consider this a personal attack
behind my bag. I am sorry if it may appear as noise for those of you who
are not really interested in what is going on for the m68k port, please
just ignore it.

Goswin> Could it be that some of Jes's personal opinion is expressed in
Goswin> his statement? I'm currently working on Eagle Linux m68k, which
Goswin> is a competition for Jes with his redhat and the air has been
Goswin> quite hot between us for several reasons.

First of all, this is utter bull shit and just shows that you seem to be
totally clueless as to is going on on the Linux/m68k mailinglist.

I did the unofficial Red Hat port because:

a) I like the way Red Hat does things and I would like to be able to run
the Red Hat distribution on my machine. I do not advocate against

b) I wanted to put out a Linux/m68k distribution for people to start use
- Linux/m68k has been lacking an easy-to-install distribution for new
and old users for a very long time. I am aware of the Debian efforts
which has been going on for a long time, but in my personal oppinion it
has been taking too long and I felt we needed something now. It is not
meant as any sort of criticism, I realise how much work it requires and
that they are lacking man-power. I exchange patches with the Debian/m68k
guys and consider most of them as good friends.

c) Giving people more options to choose from is most often not a bad

Goswin> Inbetween Jes used egcs as a reason not to use Eagle linux but
Goswin> to use Redhat (he thought we had used egcs for compileing our
Goswin> binaries, which we havent).

You gave most people the impression on the Debian/m68k list, that you
were compiling everything with egcs. I asked this and you said no
... fine, no problem with that. I never (not once) claimed that Eagle
used egcs and that people should avoid it because of that.

Goswin> Nothing against Jes, he did a great job with RH-m68k, but I cant
Goswin> secon his elaborations on egcs.

You have several times proved that you are totally ignorant when it
comes to compilers and things that will affect what you generate with
a certain compiler.

For those who do not follow the Linux/m68k list I can mention that
mr. Bredelow announced that his distribution will run on the machines
such as the NeXT and the Sun3. Neither of these are currently supported
(there are no running kernels) and binaries will not be Sun3 compatible
because the MMU and the page-size is different which matters for things
like ELF.

If you want to know what I really dislike about Eagle Linux, then it's
that I feel it is a rip-off of the good work done by the other
Debian/m68k developers, done by someone who claim it to be a great
invention of their own (AFAIK this is one way communication, ie. you
take stuff from Debian but you do not make any real contributions). The
fact that at least one of the persons working on this project has been
constantly advocating it on the m68k lists showing his total lack of a
clue does not make things better. I do not even want to comment on your
kernel `contributions' here.

I have great respect for the work done by the other Debian/m68k
developers and I am deeply sorry that their work will be published by
someone like you. I sincerly hope that it will not take away any users
confidence in the real Debian/m68k.

Yes, I am pissed off - now go away. Stop commenting upon things you do
not understand at all and stop commenting on other people behind their

Goswin> For the Eagle Linux m68k we used egcs during developement and
Goswin> for cross checking and gcc for the final stuff. Our maschines
Goswin> (m68k and i386) are running on an egcs compiled kernel for month
Goswin> without break and so far we have seen not one single problem
Goswin> caused by egcs (except that it finds more dirt in the Source).

Again, this proves absolutely NOTHING.

Once again I am sorry for posting this off-topic thing to your list.


TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: