* cygwin-xfree @ 2000-12-30 6:08 Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 19:18 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor ` (4 more replies) 0 siblings, 5 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: overseers I have recently offered CVS space to the the guy who has been working on the port of XFree86 to Cygwin. I thought he wanted it to upload the source code for a few drivers. It turns out that he wants to upload pretty much all of the XFree86 source code since there were, apparently, a number of changes required for Cygwin. So, two question: 1) What does everyone think about adding another 150MB to the server. There seems to be more than adequate disk space available for this but 150MB is still a pretty massive project. I can just imagine what will happen to sourceware the first time someone checks this out. 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory should be winsup/xfree. The winsup directory is not being mirrored by any of the CVS mirrors, right? I'm have mixed feelings about this. If we can't provide this, the developer will go to Source Forge. Maybe that's the best thing. He's already split the development that had started for cygwin so that there is just a generic msvc/mingw version of everything as well as a cygwin-specific branch. It would probably be not too much work to set up on Source Forge and maybe it would even give Cygwin a little publicity. Any thoughts on this, anyone? cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 19:18 ` Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: overseers I have recently offered CVS space to the the guy who has been working on the port of XFree86 to Cygwin. I thought he wanted it to upload the source code for a few drivers. It turns out that he wants to upload pretty much all of the XFree86 source code since there were, apparently, a number of changes required for Cygwin. So, two question: 1) What does everyone think about adding another 150MB to the server. There seems to be more than adequate disk space available for this but 150MB is still a pretty massive project. I can just imagine what will happen to sourceware the first time someone checks this out. 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory should be winsup/xfree. The winsup directory is not being mirrored by any of the CVS mirrors, right? I'm have mixed feelings about this. If we can't provide this, the developer will go to Source Forge. Maybe that's the best thing. He's already split the development that had started for cygwin so that there is just a generic msvc/mingw version of everything as well as a cygwin-specific branch. It would probably be not too much work to set up on Source Forge and maybe it would even give Cygwin a little publicity. Any thoughts on this, anyone? cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 19:18 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jason Molenda 2000-05-03 19:45 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda ` (2 more replies) 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jeffrey A Law ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 3 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jason Molenda @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 10:18:05PM -0400, Chris Faylor wrote: > 1) What does everyone think about adding another 150MB to the server. There > seems to be more than adequate disk space available for this but 150MB > is still a pretty massive project. I can just imagine what will happen > to sourceware the first time someone checks this out. IMHO 150MB isn't very much - I way overspec'ed the CVS drive so there is a lot of slack there. (On the other hand, the web drive and the htdig drive are filling at a rate faster than I had anticipated and won't last the ~18 month lifetime I had intended for this system :-( > 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory > should be winsup/xfree. It almost seems like something you'd want to put in a separate repository. I mean, it's _really_ Xfree86 with a few patches on top (OK, a lot of patches). How would you handle e.g. make or perl (I'm trying to guess at programs that might have cygwin patches to them) if someone wanted to do the same? > The winsup directory is not being mirrored by any of the CVS mirrors, right? If anyone is rsync'ing the entire src repository, they'll pick it up, but it's not the end of the world for them to end up with another ~150MB. I would think about it more like "Where do I want third party programs that we maintain patches to be checked in?" Maybe a new repository, "cygwin-mods" or something, would be the cleanest approach. But cygwin-mods is a terrible name. If he ever does get ready to start importing Xfree86, please make sure he reads the CVS manual on tracking third party sources, http://www.loria.fr/~molli/cvs/doc/cvs_13.html#SEC98 or provide exact command lines for him. It'd probably make sense to import the most recent release of xfree86, then the development version on which he's based his changes, and then check in his changes on top of that. That way if he dies in a tragic pingpong ball manufacturing plant accident, people will be able to disentangle what he was up to. It's really easy to import sources incorrectly, and annoying to recover from that at a later date. > I'm have mixed feelings about this. If we can't provide this, the developer > will go to Source Forge. I don't have a strong opinion either, I did want to interject some facts about the system and stuff, tho. J ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda @ 2000-05-03 19:45 ` Jason Molenda 2000-12-30 6:08 ` htdig, was cygwin-xfree Frank Ch. Eigler 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jason Molenda @ 2000-05-03 19:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 10:18:05PM -0400, Chris Faylor wrote: > 1) What does everyone think about adding another 150MB to the server. There > seems to be more than adequate disk space available for this but 150MB > is still a pretty massive project. I can just imagine what will happen > to sourceware the first time someone checks this out. IMHO 150MB isn't very much - I way overspec'ed the CVS drive so there is a lot of slack there. (On the other hand, the web drive and the htdig drive are filling at a rate faster than I had anticipated and won't last the ~18 month lifetime I had intended for this system :-( > 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory > should be winsup/xfree. It almost seems like something you'd want to put in a separate repository. I mean, it's _really_ Xfree86 with a few patches on top (OK, a lot of patches). How would you handle e.g. make or perl (I'm trying to guess at programs that might have cygwin patches to them) if someone wanted to do the same? > The winsup directory is not being mirrored by any of the CVS mirrors, right? If anyone is rsync'ing the entire src repository, they'll pick it up, but it's not the end of the world for them to end up with another ~150MB. I would think about it more like "Where do I want third party programs that we maintain patches to be checked in?" Maybe a new repository, "cygwin-mods" or something, would be the cleanest approach. But cygwin-mods is a terrible name. If he ever does get ready to start importing Xfree86, please make sure he reads the CVS manual on tracking third party sources, http://www.loria.fr/~molli/cvs/doc/cvs_13.html#SEC98 or provide exact command lines for him. It'd probably make sense to import the most recent release of xfree86, then the development version on which he's based his changes, and then check in his changes on top of that. That way if he dies in a tragic pingpong ball manufacturing plant accident, people will be able to disentangle what he was up to. It's really easy to import sources incorrectly, and annoying to recover from that at a later date. > I'm have mixed feelings about this. If we can't provide this, the developer > will go to Source Forge. I don't have a strong opinion either, I did want to interject some facts about the system and stuff, tho. J ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* htdig, was Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-05-03 19:45 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Frank Ch. Eigler 2000-05-03 20:23 ` Frank Ch. Eigler 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2 siblings, 2 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Frank Ch. Eigler @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jason Molenda; +Cc: Chris Faylor, overseers crash wrote: > [...] > (On the other hand, the web drive and the htdig drive are filling > at a rate faster than I had anticipated and won't last the ~18 month > lifetime I had intended for this system :-( > [...] For the htdig databases, adding "compression_level: 9" to htdig.conf should reduce the disk space usage by about 20%. Also, the rundig scripts use htdig's "-i" option (causing the databases to be regenerated from scratch), the "db.wordlist" files may be deleted after each search, saving another 30%. - FChE -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE5EO0hVZbdDOm/ZT0RAWchAJ90EhzYYEqMQzMx1dkHtIVSMKKhdwCeO3FP MEJF2ABtyxvn7TY+1mz1tWM= =gja3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* htdig, was Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` htdig, was cygwin-xfree Frank Ch. Eigler @ 2000-05-03 20:23 ` Frank Ch. Eigler 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Frank Ch. Eigler @ 2000-05-03 20:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jason Molenda; +Cc: Chris Faylor, overseers crash wrote: > [...] > (On the other hand, the web drive and the htdig drive are filling > at a rate faster than I had anticipated and won't last the ~18 month > lifetime I had intended for this system :-( > [...] For the htdig databases, adding "compression_level: 9" to htdig.conf should reduce the disk space usage by about 20%. Also, the rundig scripts use htdig's "-i" option (causing the databases to be regenerated from scratch), the "db.wordlist" files may be deleted after each search, saving another 30%. - FChE -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE5EO0hVZbdDOm/ZT0RAWchAJ90EhzYYEqMQzMx1dkHtIVSMKKhdwCeO3FP MEJF2ABtyxvn7TY+1mz1tWM= =gja3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: htdig, was Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` htdig, was cygwin-xfree Frank Ch. Eigler 2000-05-03 20:23 ` Frank Ch. Eigler @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson 2000-05-06 2:43 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson 1 sibling, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Hans-Peter Nilsson @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Frank Ch. Eigler; +Cc: Jason Molenda, Chris Faylor, overseers On Wed, 3 May 2000, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > For the htdig databases, adding "compression_level: 9" > to htdig.conf should reduce the disk space usage by about 20%. Tests show that the db.docdb "before merging" went from 324231168 to 180889600 bytes, so I made that change for the gcc installation. It is running its normally scheduled update right now, but from scratch today to save extra. Doh, I just think I should have thought about that long ago. For the curious (but not curious enough to read up) this uses zlib to individually compress each "document head"; the text that shows up for each search hit. FWIW, in 2.0 compression will be done at the DB level, which would be the right thing. If nothing broke (I'm cautious sometimes :-) we can move that conf item from gcc.conf to site.conf. > Also, the rundig scripts use htdig's "-i" option (causing the > databases to be regenerated from scratch), No, since we don't use the basic rundig, as Jason told you. > the "db.wordlist" > files may be deleted after each search, saving another 30%. No, it's needed when you do an "update" (not running from scratch). Thanks! brgds, H-P ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: htdig, was Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson @ 2000-05-06 2:43 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Hans-Peter Nilsson @ 2000-05-06 2:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Frank Ch. Eigler; +Cc: Jason Molenda, Chris Faylor, overseers On Wed, 3 May 2000, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > For the htdig databases, adding "compression_level: 9" > to htdig.conf should reduce the disk space usage by about 20%. Tests show that the db.docdb "before merging" went from 324231168 to 180889600 bytes, so I made that change for the gcc installation. It is running its normally scheduled update right now, but from scratch today to save extra. Doh, I just think I should have thought about that long ago. For the curious (but not curious enough to read up) this uses zlib to individually compress each "document head"; the text that shows up for each search hit. FWIW, in 2.0 compression will be done at the DB level, which would be the right thing. If nothing broke (I'm cautious sometimes :-) we can move that conf item from gcc.conf to site.conf. > Also, the rundig scripts use htdig's "-i" option (causing the > databases to be regenerated from scratch), No, since we don't use the basic rundig, as Jason told you. > the "db.wordlist" > files may be deleted after each search, saving another 30%. No, it's needed when you do an "update" (not running from scratch). Thanks! brgds, H-P ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-05-03 19:45 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-12-30 6:08 ` htdig, was cygwin-xfree Frank Ch. Eigler @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 19:53 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2 siblings, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jason Molenda; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 07:44:27PM -0700, Jason Molenda wrote: >> 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory >> should be winsup/xfree. > >It almost seems like something you'd want to put in a separate >repository. I mean, it's _really_ Xfree86 with a few patches on >top (OK, a lot of patches). How would you handle e.g. make or perl >(I'm trying to guess at programs that might have cygwin patches to >them) if someone wanted to do the same? Dunno. I've been thinking that the winsup directory should be its own little mini-build tree. I didn't want to pollute the rest of sourceware with stuff that was only intended for cygwin. >> The winsup directory is not being mirrored by any of the CVS mirrors, right? > >If anyone is rsync'ing the entire src repository, they'll pick it >up, but it's not the end of the world for them to end up with >another ~150MB. I would think about it more like "Where do I want >third party programs that we maintain patches to be checked in?" > >Maybe a new repository, "cygwin-mods" or something, would be the cleanest >approach. But cygwin-mods is a terrible name. Maybe cygwin-apps? >If he ever does get ready to start importing Xfree86, please make sure >he reads the CVS manual on tracking third party sources, > http://www.loria.fr/~molli/cvs/doc/cvs_13.html#SEC98 > >or provide exact command lines for him. It'd probably make sense >to import the most recent release of xfree86, then the development >version on which he's based his changes, and then check in his >changes on top of that. Yup. I supplied the exact command lines for him. And emphasized repeatedly that he follow them exactly. And he screwed them up... >That way if he dies in a tragic pingpong ball manufacturing plant accident, >people will be able to disentangle what he was up to. It's really >easy to import sources incorrectly, and annoying to recover from that >at a later date. I've repeatedly stressed this to him. He spent all last night checking everything in but somehow it never showed up on sourceware, or, at least I can't find it. He says that he understands why this happened. >>I'm have mixed feelings about this. If we can't provide this, the >>developer will go to Source Forge. > >I don't have a strong opinion either, I did want to interject some >facts about the system and stuff, tho. Thanks, Jason. cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 19:53 ` Chris Faylor 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 19:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jason Molenda; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 07:44:27PM -0700, Jason Molenda wrote: >> 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory >> should be winsup/xfree. > >It almost seems like something you'd want to put in a separate >repository. I mean, it's _really_ Xfree86 with a few patches on >top (OK, a lot of patches). How would you handle e.g. make or perl >(I'm trying to guess at programs that might have cygwin patches to >them) if someone wanted to do the same? Dunno. I've been thinking that the winsup directory should be its own little mini-build tree. I didn't want to pollute the rest of sourceware with stuff that was only intended for cygwin. >> The winsup directory is not being mirrored by any of the CVS mirrors, right? > >If anyone is rsync'ing the entire src repository, they'll pick it >up, but it's not the end of the world for them to end up with >another ~150MB. I would think about it more like "Where do I want >third party programs that we maintain patches to be checked in?" > >Maybe a new repository, "cygwin-mods" or something, would be the cleanest >approach. But cygwin-mods is a terrible name. Maybe cygwin-apps? >If he ever does get ready to start importing Xfree86, please make sure >he reads the CVS manual on tracking third party sources, > http://www.loria.fr/~molli/cvs/doc/cvs_13.html#SEC98 > >or provide exact command lines for him. It'd probably make sense >to import the most recent release of xfree86, then the development >version on which he's based his changes, and then check in his >changes on top of that. Yup. I supplied the exact command lines for him. And emphasized repeatedly that he follow them exactly. And he screwed them up... >That way if he dies in a tragic pingpong ball manufacturing plant accident, >people will be able to disentangle what he was up to. It's really >easy to import sources incorrectly, and annoying to recover from that >at a later date. I've repeatedly stressed this to him. He spent all last night checking everything in but somehow it never showed up on sourceware, or, at least I can't find it. He says that he understands why this happened. >>I'm have mixed feelings about this. If we can't provide this, the >>developer will go to Source Forge. > >I don't have a strong opinion either, I did want to interject some >facts about the system and stuff, tho. Thanks, Jason. cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 19:18 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jeffrey A Law 2000-05-04 9:07 ` cygwin-xfree Jeffrey A Law 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 4 siblings, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers In message < 20000503221805.A13179@cygnus.com >you write: > 1) What does everyone think about adding another 150MB to the server. Ther > e > seems to be more than adequate disk space available for this but 150MB > is still a pretty massive project. I can just imagine what will happen > to sourceware the first time someone checks this out. I don't see a major problem with that. We've got gobs of space for the CVS stuff. The only places we're even close to having to keep an eye on are /ftp and /www which are running at 71% and 61% capacity respectively. > 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory > should be winsup/xfree. Whatever seems reasonable to you since you're more familiar with this guy's work that I am. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jeffrey A Law @ 2000-05-04 9:07 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 2000-05-04 9:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers In message < 20000503221805.A13179@cygnus.com >you write: > 1) What does everyone think about adding another 150MB to the server. Ther > e > seems to be more than adequate disk space available for this but 150MB > is still a pretty massive project. I can just imagine what will happen > to sourceware the first time someone checks this out. I don't see a major problem with that. We've got gobs of space for the CVS stuff. The only places we're even close to having to keep an eye on are /ftp and /www which are running at 71% and 61% capacity respectively. > 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory > should be winsup/xfree. Whatever seems reasonable to you since you're more familiar with this guy's work that I am. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jeffrey A Law @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-05-03 19:30 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney ` (2 more replies) 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 4 siblings, 3 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cagney @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers Chris Faylor wrote: > > I have recently offered CVS space to the the guy who has been working on > the port of XFree86 to Cygwin. > > I thought he wanted it to upload the source code for a few drivers. > > It turns out that he wants to upload pretty much all of the XFree86 > source code since there were, apparently, a number of changes required > for Cygwin. > > So, two question: > > 1) What does everyone think about adding another 150MB to the server. There > seems to be more than adequate disk space available for this but 150MB > is still a pretty massive project. I can just imagine what will happen > to sourceware the first time someone checks this out. > > 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory > should be winsup/xfree. The winsup directory is not being mirrored by > any of the CVS mirrors, right? > > I'm have mixed feelings about this. If we can't provide this, the developer > will go to Source Forge. Maybe that's the best thing. He's already split > the development that had started for cygwin so that there is just a generic > msvc/mingw version of everything as well as a cygwin-specific branch. It > would probably be not too much work to set up on Source Forge and maybe > it would even give Cygwin a little publicity. Where is the public xfree86 CVS repository? Hmm: http://www.xfree86.org/developer.html > To become an XFree86 developer you first need to join The XFree86 > Project as a non-voting member. Access to the XFree86 development > code is only available to project members, and being a member provides > the necessary legal status to allow developers to access information > available to the project from other sources. there isn't one. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney @ 2000-05-03 19:30 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cagney @ 2000-05-03 19:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers Chris Faylor wrote: > > I have recently offered CVS space to the the guy who has been working on > the port of XFree86 to Cygwin. > > I thought he wanted it to upload the source code for a few drivers. > > It turns out that he wants to upload pretty much all of the XFree86 > source code since there were, apparently, a number of changes required > for Cygwin. > > So, two question: > > 1) What does everyone think about adding another 150MB to the server. There > seems to be more than adequate disk space available for this but 150MB > is still a pretty massive project. I can just imagine what will happen > to sourceware the first time someone checks this out. > > 2) I assume that if you all think that 1) is no problem then this directory > should be winsup/xfree. The winsup directory is not being mirrored by > any of the CVS mirrors, right? > > I'm have mixed feelings about this. If we can't provide this, the developer > will go to Source Forge. Maybe that's the best thing. He's already split > the development that had started for cygwin so that there is just a generic > msvc/mingw version of everything as well as a cygwin-specific branch. It > would probably be not too much work to set up on Source Forge and maybe > it would even give Cygwin a little publicity. Where is the public xfree86 CVS repository? Hmm: http://www.xfree86.org/developer.html > To become an XFree86 developer you first need to join The XFree86 > Project as a non-voting member. Access to the XFree86 development > code is only available to project members, and being a member provides > the necessary legal status to allow developers to access information > available to the project from other sources. there isn't one. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney 2000-05-03 19:30 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-05-03 19:47 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2 siblings, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ac131313; +Cc: cgf, overseers > Where is the public xfree86 CVS repository? Hmm: . . . > there isn't one. Well, yes, and we (there is no we) would like them to open up. Progress so far has been pretty slow although there seems to be general claims that they are moving in the openness direction. One bright spot is that the Direct Rendering Infrastructure is at http://dri.sourceforge.net/ - the Precision Insight folks are doing a lot of X work, some of it with Red Hat funding. As for what to tell the cygwin-xfree people, sounds good to me if they take it to sourceforge. Unless people see some big problem with that (as it says on the main page, we are the Hosting Site To the World at this time). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon @ 2000-05-03 19:47 ` Jim Kingdon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-05-03 19:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ac131313; +Cc: cgf, overseers > Where is the public xfree86 CVS repository? Hmm: . . . > there isn't one. Well, yes, and we (there is no we) would like them to open up. Progress so far has been pretty slow although there seems to be general claims that they are moving in the openness direction. One bright spot is that the Direct Rendering Infrastructure is at http://dri.sourceforge.net/ - the Precision Insight folks are doing a lot of X work, some of it with Red Hat funding. As for what to tell the cygwin-xfree people, sounds good to me if they take it to sourceforge. Unless people see some big problem with that (as it says on the main page, we are the Hosting Site To the World at this time). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney 2000-05-03 19:30 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 19:34 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2 siblings, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: overseers On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 12:29:03PM +1000, Andrew Cagney wrote: >Where is the public xfree86 CVS repository? Hmm: > > http://www.xfree86.org/developer.html >> To become an XFree86 developer you first need to join The XFree86 >> Project as a non-voting member. Access to the XFree86 development >> code is only available to project members, and being a member provides >> the necessary legal status to allow developers to access information >> available to the project from other sources. > >there isn't one. AFAIK, this isn't development code. It should be released, publicly available code. I'm not 100% certain of that, though. cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 19:34 ` Chris Faylor 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 19:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: overseers On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 12:29:03PM +1000, Andrew Cagney wrote: >Where is the public xfree86 CVS repository? Hmm: > > http://www.xfree86.org/developer.html >> To become an XFree86 developer you first need to join The XFree86 >> Project as a non-voting member. Access to the XFree86 development >> code is only available to project members, and being a member provides >> the necessary legal status to allow developers to access information >> available to the project from other sources. > >there isn't one. AFAIK, this isn't development code. It should be released, publicly available code. I'm not 100% certain of that, though. cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Tom Tromey 2000-05-03 19:59 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 4 siblings, 2 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers Chris> Any thoughts on this, anyone? My thought is that the very best approach is for us to be good citizens and get this into the official X distribution. Based on history that is a political nightmare, but we must definitely try before we give up. As to whether we should host it while we (a word which I sometimes use to mean "someone else") do this, I don't know. Hey, I just make user accounts and occasionally complain. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey @ 2000-05-03 19:59 ` Tom Tromey 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 1 sibling, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2000-05-03 19:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers Chris> Any thoughts on this, anyone? My thought is that the very best approach is for us to be good citizens and get this into the official X distribution. Based on history that is a political nightmare, but we must definitely try before we give up. As to whether we should host it while we (a word which I sometimes use to mean "someone else") do this, I don't know. Hey, I just make user accounts and occasionally complain. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2000-05-03 19:59 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 20:07 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Tromey; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 07:59:22PM -0700, Tom Tromey wrote: >Chris> Any thoughts on this, anyone? > >My thought is that the very best approach is for us to be good >citizens and get this into the official X distribution. >Based on history that is a political nightmare, but we must definitely >try before we give up. Believe me they've tried. Cygwin's GPL licensing restrictions are apparently unacceptable to the xfree project. That's a real shame. >As to whether we should host it while we (a word which I sometimes use >to mean "someone else") do this, I don't know. Hey, I just make user >accounts and occasionally complain. Well, I just ask for user accounts and occasionally complain but I suspect that this would have to be hosted for a long time. I wouldn't want to anger the XFree86 developers, though. I hate politics. cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 20:07 ` Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Per Bothner 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Tromey; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 07:59:22PM -0700, Tom Tromey wrote: >Chris> Any thoughts on this, anyone? > >My thought is that the very best approach is for us to be good >citizens and get this into the official X distribution. >Based on history that is a political nightmare, but we must definitely >try before we give up. Believe me they've tried. Cygwin's GPL licensing restrictions are apparently unacceptable to the xfree project. That's a real shame. >As to whether we should host it while we (a word which I sometimes use >to mean "someone else") do this, I don't know. Hey, I just make user >accounts and occasionally complain. Well, I just ask for user accounts and occasionally complain but I suspect that this would have to be hosted for a long time. I wouldn't want to anger the XFree86 developers, though. I hate politics. cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 20:07 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Per Bothner 2000-05-03 23:21 ` cygwin-xfree Per Bothner 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2 siblings, 2 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Per Bothner @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers Chris Faylor <cgf@cygnus.com> writes: > Believe me they've tried. Cygwin's GPL licensing restrictions are > apparently unacceptable to the xfree project. That's a real shame. But that shouldn't really be an issue, should it, assuming I correctly understand that the goal of this project is to create a *port* of X that runs under Cygwin. How is this different from creating a port of X that runs under SunOS? You just have to keep separate the modifications to X (which remain under the X license) and the modifications to Cygwin (which are under the GPL). Presumably, he has to write some new glue code - which should be considered part of (and distributed with) either X or Cygwin, depending on what makes most sense. Now of course there is nothing that prevents us from releasing a CD that contain *both* Cygwin and X - just like there is nothing preventing Sun from releasing a CD containing both Solaris including X. -- --Per Bothner per@bothner.com http://www.bothner.com/~per/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Per Bothner @ 2000-05-03 23:21 ` Per Bothner 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 1 sibling, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Per Bothner @ 2000-05-03 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: overseers Chris Faylor <cgf@cygnus.com> writes: > Believe me they've tried. Cygwin's GPL licensing restrictions are > apparently unacceptable to the xfree project. That's a real shame. But that shouldn't really be an issue, should it, assuming I correctly understand that the goal of this project is to create a *port* of X that runs under Cygwin. How is this different from creating a port of X that runs under SunOS? You just have to keep separate the modifications to X (which remain under the X license) and the modifications to Cygwin (which are under the GPL). Presumably, he has to write some new glue code - which should be considered part of (and distributed with) either X or Cygwin, depending on what makes most sense. Now of course there is nothing that prevents us from releasing a CD that contain *both* Cygwin and X - just like there is nothing preventing Sun from releasing a CD containing both Solaris including X. -- --Per Bothner per@bothner.com http://www.bothner.com/~per/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Per Bothner 2000-05-03 23:21 ` cygwin-xfree Per Bothner @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-05-04 4:35 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 1 sibling, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: per; +Cc: cgf, overseers > How is this different from creating a port of X that runs under SunOS? At the risk of starting/continuing Yet Another Pointless Licensing Flamewar.... The SunOS libc and other required libraries aren't under a viral license (some proprietary compiler vendors, at least in the PC world, tried this some years ago, but they didn't get away with it. The most amusing crash and burn being the TI-99/4 which wanted developers to pay to develop products on that platform, sign NDA's, etc. With the predictable result - no applications and the eventual death of the platform). Now whether that has anything to do with the difficulty in getting the cygwin XFree patches merged in, I don't know. Over in Cristian's group (don't remember who specifically builds the XFree RPMs for the Red Hat Linux product but someone over there) they ship about 40 patches to XFree (last I looked), and licensing isn't an issue in that context. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon @ 2000-05-04 4:35 ` Jim Kingdon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-05-04 4:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: per; +Cc: cgf, overseers > How is this different from creating a port of X that runs under SunOS? At the risk of starting/continuing Yet Another Pointless Licensing Flamewar.... The SunOS libc and other required libraries aren't under a viral license (some proprietary compiler vendors, at least in the PC world, tried this some years ago, but they didn't get away with it. The most amusing crash and burn being the TI-99/4 which wanted developers to pay to develop products on that platform, sign NDA's, etc. With the predictable result - no applications and the eventual death of the platform). Now whether that has anything to do with the difficulty in getting the cygwin XFree patches merged in, I don't know. Over in Cristian's group (don't remember who specifically builds the XFree RPMs for the Red Hat Linux product but someone over there) they ship about 40 patches to XFree (last I looked), and licensing isn't an issue in that context. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 20:07 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Per Bothner @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Tom Tromey 2000-05-03 20:09 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey ` (2 more replies) 2 siblings, 3 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: Tom Tromey, overseers >> Based on history that is a political nightmare, but we must definitely >> try before we give up. Chris> Believe me they've tried. That's good enough for me. If Jason says that sourceware can handle the load, then I'm ok with hosting it. Ideal would be if we could point to somebody with final say. When Jason was running sourceware it was him. Jim, are you the guy now? I know it isn't me. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey @ 2000-05-03 20:09 ` Tom Tromey 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` libstdc++-v3 things that still are not working correctly Benjamin Kosnik 2 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2000-05-03 20:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chris Faylor; +Cc: Tom Tromey, overseers >> Based on history that is a political nightmare, but we must definitely >> try before we give up. Chris> Believe me they've tried. That's good enough for me. If Jason says that sourceware can handle the load, then I'm ok with hosting it. Ideal would be if we could point to somebody with final say. When Jason was running sourceware it was him. Jim, are you the guy now? I know it isn't me. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2000-05-03 20:09 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 20:22 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor ` (2 more replies) 2000-12-30 6:08 ` libstdc++-v3 things that still are not working correctly Benjamin Kosnik 2 siblings, 3 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Tromey; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 08:09:38PM -0700, Tom Tromey wrote: >>> Based on history that is a political nightmare, but we must definitely >>> try before we give up. > >Chris> Believe me they've tried. > >That's good enough for me. If Jason says that sourceware can handle >the load, then I'm ok with hosting it. Ideal would be if we could >point to somebody with final say. When Jason was running sourceware >it was him. Jim, are you the guy now? I know it isn't me. We used to have the kindly king Jason, who ruled over sourceware in the Golden Age. I sort of thought that, in the current Silver Age, there was a triumverate of terror who ruled over all things sourceware. These three are trying to stamp out all memory of Jason with their sinister "red hat" squad that is attempting to wipe out all memory of the beloved monarch by renaming the sourceware site to something else. I know that Jason claimed to have left office voluntarily but I've always had my suspicions... cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 20:22 ` Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Bob Manson 2 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-03 20:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Tromey; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 08:09:38PM -0700, Tom Tromey wrote: >>> Based on history that is a political nightmare, but we must definitely >>> try before we give up. > >Chris> Believe me they've tried. > >That's good enough for me. If Jason says that sourceware can handle >the load, then I'm ok with hosting it. Ideal would be if we could >point to somebody with final say. When Jason was running sourceware >it was him. Jim, are you the guy now? I know it isn't me. We used to have the kindly king Jason, who ruled over sourceware in the Golden Age. I sort of thought that, in the current Silver Age, there was a triumverate of terror who ruled over all things sourceware. These three are trying to stamp out all memory of Jason with their sinister "red hat" squad that is attempting to wipe out all memory of the beloved monarch by renaming the sourceware site to something else. I know that Jason claimed to have left office voluntarily but I've always had my suspicions... cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 20:22 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-05-04 4:52 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Bob Manson 2 siblings, 2 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cgf; +Cc: tromey, overseers > I sort of thought that, in the current Silver Age, there was a > triumverate of terror who ruled over all things sourceware. Yup, that's the way I see it. C'mon, Tom, you can't inspire Terror (that's with a capital "T") by saying "I only work here". If you are in doubt, just keep them guessing about what the decision was and who made it. That's always a good way to be an Evil Overlord. More seriously, usually Jeff, Tom and I are able to agree on stuff with some discussion. For the most part things end of reducing to "who will do the work" rather than "who decides stuff like technical direction" since the latter is more the project leaders anyway. As for cygwin-xfree, I'm still looking for objections to suggesting they go to sourceforge. One of the requirements for being on kingdon-rules.redhat.com, er, sourceware.cygnus.com, is a sponsor within Red Hat and in the XFree case we only seem to have one partial reluctant one (Chris). It's different than Cygwin itself as nearly as I can tell. As for angering XFree. I could write essays on the subject (short summary: don't let such concerns gridlock development) but the point is, that's something that a project leader would need to be willing to deal with. I don't see it as a matter for the Sourceware Central. At least, not primarily. > I know that Jason claimed to have left office voluntarily but I've > always had my suspicions... And suspicions they will remain. We can't very well maintain our aura of palace intrigue if we tell you what *really* happened, can we? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon @ 2000-05-04 4:52 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 1 sibling, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-05-04 4:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cgf; +Cc: tromey, overseers > I sort of thought that, in the current Silver Age, there was a > triumverate of terror who ruled over all things sourceware. Yup, that's the way I see it. C'mon, Tom, you can't inspire Terror (that's with a capital "T") by saying "I only work here". If you are in doubt, just keep them guessing about what the decision was and who made it. That's always a good way to be an Evil Overlord. More seriously, usually Jeff, Tom and I are able to agree on stuff with some discussion. For the most part things end of reducing to "who will do the work" rather than "who decides stuff like technical direction" since the latter is more the project leaders anyway. As for cygwin-xfree, I'm still looking for objections to suggesting they go to sourceforge. One of the requirements for being on kingdon-rules.redhat.com, er, sourceware.cygnus.com, is a sponsor within Red Hat and in the XFree case we only seem to have one partial reluctant one (Chris). It's different than Cygwin itself as nearly as I can tell. As for angering XFree. I could write essays on the subject (short summary: don't let such concerns gridlock development) but the point is, that's something that a project leader would need to be willing to deal with. I don't see it as a matter for the Sourceware Central. At least, not primarily. > I know that Jason claimed to have left office voluntarily but I've > always had my suspicions... And suspicions they will remain. We can't very well maintain our aura of palace intrigue if we tell you what *really* happened, can we? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-05-04 4:52 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Chris Faylor 2000-05-04 7:48 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 1 sibling, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jim Kingdon; +Cc: tromey, overseers On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 07:52:02AM -0400, Jim Kingdon wrote: >As for cygwin-xfree, I'm still looking for objections to suggesting >they go to sourceforge. One of the requirements for being on >kingdon-rules.redhat.com, er, sourceware.cygnus.com, is a sponsor >within Red Hat and in the XFree case we only seem to have one partial >reluctant one (Chris). It's different than Cygwin itself as nearly as >I can tell. I didn't mean to portray reluctance. I *am* really interested in having this on sourceware. I just wanted to make sure that everyone realized that I was not going to stomp my feet if the consensus was that sourceware should not host this. I probably went a little too much in the other direction when I mentioned Source Forge. cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-04 7:48 ` Chris Faylor 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Chris Faylor @ 2000-05-04 7:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jim Kingdon; +Cc: tromey, overseers On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 07:52:02AM -0400, Jim Kingdon wrote: >As for cygwin-xfree, I'm still looking for objections to suggesting >they go to sourceforge. One of the requirements for being on >kingdon-rules.redhat.com, er, sourceware.cygnus.com, is a sponsor >within Red Hat and in the XFree case we only seem to have one partial >reluctant one (Chris). It's different than Cygwin itself as nearly as >I can tell. I didn't mean to portray reluctance. I *am* really interested in having this on sourceware. I just wanted to make sure that everyone realized that I was not going to stomp my feet if the consensus was that sourceware should not host this. I probably went a little too much in the other direction when I mentioned Source Forge. cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 20:22 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Bob Manson 2000-05-03 21:11 ` cygwin-xfree Bob Manson 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2 siblings, 2 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Bob Manson @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: overseers In message < 20000503232221.D13804@cygnus.com >, Chris Faylor writes: >We used to have the kindly king Jason, who ruled over sourceware in the >Golden Age. He was no kindly king. He was the Ruler of Evil! Evil, I tell you! I quaked in fear whenver he typed! I used to tremble in my luxurious penthouse condominium whenver he would threaten us with bodily harm. Oh, Jason, wherefor art thou? Bob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Bob Manson @ 2000-05-03 21:11 ` Bob Manson 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 1 sibling, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Bob Manson @ 2000-05-03 21:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: overseers In message < 20000503232221.D13804@cygnus.com >, Chris Faylor writes: >We used to have the kindly king Jason, who ruled over sourceware in the >Golden Age. He was no kindly king. He was the Ruler of Evil! Evil, I tell you! I quaked in fear whenver he typed! I used to tremble in my luxurious penthouse condominium whenver he would threaten us with bodily harm. Oh, Jason, wherefor art thou? Bob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Bob Manson 2000-05-03 21:11 ` cygwin-xfree Bob Manson @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jason Molenda 2000-05-04 13:19 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jason Molenda @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bob Manson; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 09:12:14PM -0700, Bob Manson wrote: > He was no kindly king. He was the Ruler of Evil! Evil, I tell you! > I quaked in fear whenver he typed! It's true, it's all true. Cygnus is actually a training ground for Evil, and after half a dozen years, I had been well trained in the Insufficient Light Side by my master, Stan Shebs, as were the other disciples. As I write this, we are all moving into the Silicon Valley power structure and we will soon issue our demands for <pinkie>one MILLION dollars</pinkie> or we'll bring SV to its knees. Evil is a lost art these days, and it behooves all of us to live it every day. I got a copy of that "ILOVEYOU" worm. Its evilness is so pathetic -- the author showed no pride in workmanship, no true commitment to evil (Oooh, it overwrites your mp3 files, so destructive.) Pathetic! On a slightly serious note, it was the easiest path for me to take to decide and implement (nearly) everything on the sourceware system. It was helpful for really rapid deployment. I think I've written about this in the past, but, in retrospect, it was a mistake to not get more buy-in from Cygnus officially at some point. Back in the summer of '98 it would have been a huge mistake to get marketing et al tied in to sourceware. But the result of doing it on the side, with managers looking the other way when sourceware maintainers have to spend time on it, is not very effective. We should have (or present tense, should) convinced management to pony up for a full time person and hooked it into the rest of the company's organization. Jason ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda @ 2000-05-04 13:19 ` Jason Molenda 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Stan Shebs 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jason Molenda @ 2000-05-04 13:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bob Manson; +Cc: overseers On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 09:12:14PM -0700, Bob Manson wrote: > He was no kindly king. He was the Ruler of Evil! Evil, I tell you! > I quaked in fear whenver he typed! It's true, it's all true. Cygnus is actually a training ground for Evil, and after half a dozen years, I had been well trained in the Insufficient Light Side by my master, Stan Shebs, as were the other disciples. As I write this, we are all moving into the Silicon Valley power structure and we will soon issue our demands for <pinkie>one MILLION dollars</pinkie> or we'll bring SV to its knees. Evil is a lost art these days, and it behooves all of us to live it every day. I got a copy of that "ILOVEYOU" worm. Its evilness is so pathetic -- the author showed no pride in workmanship, no true commitment to evil (Oooh, it overwrites your mp3 files, so destructive.) Pathetic! On a slightly serious note, it was the easiest path for me to take to decide and implement (nearly) everything on the sourceware system. It was helpful for really rapid deployment. I think I've written about this in the past, but, in retrospect, it was a mistake to not get more buy-in from Cygnus officially at some point. Back in the summer of '98 it would have been a huge mistake to get marketing et al tied in to sourceware. But the result of doing it on the side, with managers looking the other way when sourceware maintainers have to spend time on it, is not very effective. We should have (or present tense, should) convinced management to pony up for a full time person and hooked it into the rest of the company's organization. Jason ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-05-04 13:19 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Stan Shebs 2000-05-21 22:19 ` cygwin-xfree Stan Shebs 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Mark Galassi 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2 siblings, 2 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Stan Shebs @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jason Molenda; +Cc: Bob Manson, overseers Jason Molenda wrote: > > On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 09:12:14PM -0700, Bob Manson wrote: > > > He was no kindly king. He was the Ruler of Evil! Evil, I tell you! > > I quaked in fear whenver he typed! > > It's true, it's all true. Cygnus is actually a training ground > for Evil, Not true! Don't you remember when we got the fan mail sent into info@cygnus, telling us how great GNU was and how we Cygnites were doing God's work? Alas, it wasn't one of the paying customers... > We > should have (or present tense, should) convinced management to pony > up for a full time person and hooked it into the rest of the > company's organization. For those who need to work on this, allow me to recommend the power of the nag. These days, managers are so interrupt-driven that the one-time mail message gets lost in the noise. Nagging serves the dual purposes of regular reminder and effective increase in priority; keeping the issue "paged in", as it were. Once a week is good, daily is usually too much, monthly is too sparse. Be sure the nag includes specific activities with dollars and dates, otherwise it degenerates into whining, which is useless. Stan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Stan Shebs @ 2000-05-21 22:19 ` Stan Shebs 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Mark Galassi 1 sibling, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Stan Shebs @ 2000-05-21 22:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jason Molenda; +Cc: Bob Manson, overseers Jason Molenda wrote: > > On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 09:12:14PM -0700, Bob Manson wrote: > > > He was no kindly king. He was the Ruler of Evil! Evil, I tell you! > > I quaked in fear whenver he typed! > > It's true, it's all true. Cygnus is actually a training ground > for Evil, Not true! Don't you remember when we got the fan mail sent into info@cygnus, telling us how great GNU was and how we Cygnites were doing God's work? Alas, it wasn't one of the paying customers... > We > should have (or present tense, should) convinced management to pony > up for a full time person and hooked it into the rest of the > company's organization. For those who need to work on this, allow me to recommend the power of the nag. These days, managers are so interrupt-driven that the one-time mail message gets lost in the noise. Nagging serves the dual purposes of regular reminder and effective increase in priority; keeping the issue "paged in", as it were. Once a week is good, daily is usually too much, monthly is too sparse. Be sure the nag includes specific activities with dollars and dates, otherwise it degenerates into whining, which is useless. Stan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Stan Shebs 2000-05-21 22:19 ` cygwin-xfree Stan Shebs @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Mark Galassi 2000-05-22 6:15 ` cygwin-xfree Mark Galassi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Mark Galassi @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: shebs; +Cc: Jason Molenda, Bob Manson, overseers Stan> Not true! Don't you remember when we got the fan mail sent Stan> into info@cygnus, telling us how great GNU was and how we Stan> Cygnites were doing God's work? Alas, it wasn't one of the Stan> paying customers... Yes, but do you also remember the time we got a letter from a guy who was really upset with us because of Cygwin32? He said that it was possible to run POSIX applications on NT with that, so his employer insisted on using NT. If Cygwin32 had not been around he would have been able to use UNIX at work. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Mark Galassi @ 2000-05-22 6:15 ` Mark Galassi 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Mark Galassi @ 2000-05-22 6:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: shebs; +Cc: Jason Molenda, Bob Manson, overseers Stan> Not true! Don't you remember when we got the fan mail sent Stan> into info@cygnus, telling us how great GNU was and how we Stan> Cygnites were doing God's work? Alas, it wasn't one of the Stan> paying customers... Yes, but do you also remember the time we got a letter from a guy who was really upset with us because of Cygwin32? He said that it was possible to run POSIX applications on NT with that, so his employer insisted on using NT. If Cygwin32 had not been around he would have been able to use UNIX at work. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-05-04 13:19 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Stan Shebs @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-05-07 6:32 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2 siblings, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jason-swarelist; +Cc: overseers > in retrospect, it was a mistake to not get more buy-in from Cygnus > officially at some point. Back in the summer of '98 it would have > been a huge mistake to get marketing et al tied in to sourceware. Well, I'm sort of trying to involve the whole company more, e.g. with sending the rename question to the company wide list. And I have talked with a few people in marketing (not decision makers in marketing, but actually "decision maker in marketing" can be a bit of an oxymoron just now - most notably because Tom Butta (chief marketing officer) was replaced only a few weeks ago). > We should have (or present tense, should) convinced management to pony > up for a full time person and hooked it into the rest of the company's > organization. Part of the problem in the past was figuring out where in the organization this kind of thing might hook in. Although I guess the problem now is more that loss leaders are just really hard to get funded (or maybe not, that's what I thought and then Jim Blandy got funded for 6 months to go hack on version control, which just goes to show that I don't really understand - or something). If anyone in Red Hat is interested in working on this problem, take a look at my internal page on sourceware strategy (email me for the URL on the intranet if you need it), and let me know your thoughts. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: cygwin-xfree 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon @ 2000-05-07 6:32 ` Jim Kingdon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-05-07 6:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jason-swarelist; +Cc: overseers > in retrospect, it was a mistake to not get more buy-in from Cygnus > officially at some point. Back in the summer of '98 it would have > been a huge mistake to get marketing et al tied in to sourceware. Well, I'm sort of trying to involve the whole company more, e.g. with sending the rename question to the company wide list. And I have talked with a few people in marketing (not decision makers in marketing, but actually "decision maker in marketing" can be a bit of an oxymoron just now - most notably because Tom Butta (chief marketing officer) was replaced only a few weeks ago). > We should have (or present tense, should) convinced management to pony > up for a full time person and hooked it into the rest of the company's > organization. Part of the problem in the past was figuring out where in the organization this kind of thing might hook in. Although I guess the problem now is more that loss leaders are just really hard to get funded (or maybe not, that's what I thought and then Jim Blandy got funded for 6 months to go hack on version control, which just goes to show that I don't really understand - or something). If anyone in Red Hat is interested in working on this problem, take a look at my internal page on sourceware strategy (email me for the URL on the intranet if you need it), and let me know your thoughts. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* libstdc++-v3 things that still are not working correctly 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2000-05-03 20:09 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Benjamin Kosnik 2000-05-03 20:14 ` Benjamin Kosnik 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jeffrey A Law 2 siblings, 2 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Kosnik @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: overseers Please, somebody, help. 1) CVS web seems to be pointing at the old repository 2) html web pages are still not being updated, even with all the latest greatest helpful hints and everything. 3) libstdc++-cvs mapped over to egcs/libstdc++-v3 checkins. -benjamin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* libstdc++-v3 things that still are not working correctly 2000-12-30 6:08 ` libstdc++-v3 things that still are not working correctly Benjamin Kosnik @ 2000-05-03 20:14 ` Benjamin Kosnik 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jeffrey A Law 1 sibling, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Kosnik @ 2000-05-03 20:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: overseers Please, somebody, help. 1) CVS web seems to be pointing at the old repository 2) html web pages are still not being updated, even with all the latest greatest helpful hints and everything. 3) libstdc++-cvs mapped over to egcs/libstdc++-v3 checkins. -benjamin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: libstdc++-v3 things that still are not working correctly 2000-12-30 6:08 ` libstdc++-v3 things that still are not working correctly Benjamin Kosnik 2000-05-03 20:14 ` Benjamin Kosnik @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jeffrey A Law 2000-05-03 22:33 ` Jeffrey A Law 1 sibling, 1 reply; 48+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Benjamin Kosnik; +Cc: overseers In message < Pine.SOL.3.91.1000503201215.12936B-100000@cse.cygnus.com >you writ e: > > Please, somebody, help. > > > 1) CVS web seems to be pointing at the old repository That would be a problem with your download.html page. I tried to fix it, but the change apparently didn't show up on the web server. > 2) html web pages are still not being updated, even with all the latest > greatest helpful hints and everything. Well, at least one problem was the loginfo file was wrong. I still do not know why it isn't working though. A "+" in a regexp means one or more copies of the previously matched pattern. So "libstdc++-v3" didn't work like people expected. Changing it to libstdc..-v3 should help. I ran into this when fixing #3 below. > 3) libstdc++-cvs mapped over to egcs/libstdc++-v3 checkins. Fixed. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
* Re: libstdc++-v3 things that still are not working correctly 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jeffrey A Law @ 2000-05-03 22:33 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 0 replies; 48+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 2000-05-03 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Benjamin Kosnik; +Cc: overseers In message < Pine.SOL.3.91.1000503201215.12936B-100000@cse.cygnus.com >you writ e: > > Please, somebody, help. > > > 1) CVS web seems to be pointing at the old repository That would be a problem with your download.html page. I tried to fix it, but the change apparently didn't show up on the web server. > 2) html web pages are still not being updated, even with all the latest > greatest helpful hints and everything. Well, at least one problem was the loginfo file was wrong. I still do not know why it isn't working though. A "+" in a regexp means one or more copies of the previously matched pattern. So "libstdc++-v3" didn't work like people expected. Changing it to libstdc..-v3 should help. I ran into this when fixing #3 below. > 3) libstdc++-cvs mapped over to egcs/libstdc++-v3 checkins. Fixed. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 48+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-12-30 6:08 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 48+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2000-12-30 6:08 cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 19:18 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-05-03 19:45 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-12-30 6:08 ` htdig, was cygwin-xfree Frank Ch. Eigler 2000-05-03 20:23 ` Frank Ch. Eigler 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson 2000-05-06 2:43 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 19:53 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jeffrey A Law 2000-05-04 9:07 ` cygwin-xfree Jeffrey A Law 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney 2000-05-03 19:30 ` cygwin-xfree Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-05-03 19:47 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 19:34 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2000-05-03 19:59 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 20:07 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Per Bothner 2000-05-03 23:21 ` cygwin-xfree Per Bothner 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-05-04 4:35 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2000-05-03 20:09 ` cygwin-xfree Tom Tromey 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-03 20:22 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-05-04 4:52 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-05-04 7:48 ` cygwin-xfree Chris Faylor 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Bob Manson 2000-05-03 21:11 ` cygwin-xfree Bob Manson 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-05-04 13:19 ` cygwin-xfree Jason Molenda 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Stan Shebs 2000-05-21 22:19 ` cygwin-xfree Stan Shebs 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Mark Galassi 2000-05-22 6:15 ` cygwin-xfree Mark Galassi 2000-12-30 6:08 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-05-07 6:32 ` cygwin-xfree Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` libstdc++-v3 things that still are not working correctly Benjamin Kosnik 2000-05-03 20:14 ` Benjamin Kosnik 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jeffrey A Law 2000-05-03 22:33 ` Jeffrey A Law
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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).