Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:14:07 -0400
From:      Aryeh Friedman <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com>
To:        FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: OS to replace FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <CAGBxaXm8VEGQH=QABJe1o83wDe_NP_U6KgprxgzcyXZdHqYm4g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210321120633.00004136@seibercom.net>
References:  <20210320132339.00004d9a@seibercom.net> <38EDD406-3EC4-4F71-B990-DDD1E753D091@kreme.com> <20210321113403.00004056@seibercom.net> <CAGBxaXmV8Z7G=NCw3AX+rhn3QNjMvNAqKPVNOYEnTFMZEq9Pgg@mail.gmail.com> <20210321120633.00004136@seibercom.net>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 12:07 PM Jerry <jerry@seibercom.net> wrote:

> >Why should they?!?!?
> >
> >The reasons for "why should they" are:
> >1. There is an almost infinite number of combinations of hardware that
> >one can find out there and most of them are like the person you are
> >replying to edge cases that effect very few people (as witnessed by
> >you can't find anyone with a close enough system that is willing to
> >actually do the work to test any fixes on... so this leaves two
> >options: a) you stop complaining and help actually fix the bug, b) you
> >switch OS's.... either way stop publically whining about stuff you
> >refuse to help with in an way and if you switch OS's this is the wrong
> >forum to do it in -- in short STFU)
> >
> >2. They *DO* list hardware that is *KNOWN* to be 100% compatible and
> >working with the base system if you are not using one of the listed
> >components then you are venturing into unknown territory and any
> >problems are on you to report and or help fix... if you decide to go
> >this route then you have no one except yourself to blame when you run
> >into "some assembly required" situations and likely you are one the
> >few people that can help fix it... yet you refuse to... again STFU
>
> I have no problem with them listing every system they know to be 100%
> companionable. However, logistically, I believe the to be a
> impractical. I think the possibility of them actually testing every
> possible controller, et cetera under every conceivable environment to be
> absurd. All they really need to do is compile a list of known units with
> incompatibility issues, post them and then keep them updated.
>

Again why should they if the issue is an open and actively being
investigated bug report.   The purpose of such a list is for things the
have decided not to support and any device that claims support for function
X but does not quite meet the standard (as implemented in the kernel) is
then by definition a bug that needs to be looked into.   The bug you are
complaining about *IS* being actively looked into and thus does not belong
on the "we don't support list".

So once again you are wasting your time and everyone else's time by barking
up a tree that doesn't exist (and should not exist).   So either switch to
another OS or help solve the issue your complaining about.   Neither option
is really the territory of -questions@ so once again STFU.


-- 
Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer, http://www.PetiteCloud.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGBxaXm8VEGQH=QABJe1o83wDe_NP_U6KgprxgzcyXZdHqYm4g>