From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sun Mar 21 18:26:12 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E799057F4E4 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 18:26:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jerry@seibercom.net) Received: from mail-qt1-x831.google.com (mail-qt1-x831.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::831]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F3R0N0JfQz3lmD for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 18:26:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jerry@seibercom.net) Received: by mail-qt1-x831.google.com with SMTP id j7so10791533qtx.5 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:26:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=seibercom.net; s=google; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:reply-to :organization:mime-version; bh=3hRxqOUn9jl9hRxeLMW8/OetQg1noVMoVn/OHNVpSyk=; b=VRbvQ66uvmT+SKLzYz9dAwmwcoP8uN1kh1OEtTXxnyMY6C2weJGK9Fov6GVucwho4k Cjtk2nBWWbGWU/CCCw3EhTeTDhPFWxER2/+tUoUdihCnr9M2qYqPnPERKSLVkDi9O1iA i9wjEVHPLFC8kvZg23wazbaT6kNRb5kxUiYBw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:reply-to:organization:mime-version; bh=3hRxqOUn9jl9hRxeLMW8/OetQg1noVMoVn/OHNVpSyk=; b=H+uqtiHQ+en68atKj3iiQ4EK3sWCWnJEqEh9nsNWJhC0ziCyxUo3FkiRAtSxNz1F0d m8UGusuopzYiF4ltdN0D+WBzKs3FCcpVNIf4RTlNunr+k5eNGALgJHt5r1H3ygtlpyfw 91S+Vp2b/4oSA4YytAM2Q/z8XNRIk72dl+QmqZ28Ku1bD8k6XbrT3sh9rWaNJ7XsaM63 B3v5bsYF5E8Zc4I2hseMIO3Z23FrclUOeZ3KhXU/I+tywAZeP/a09rvK5/9hPx5DO6+m Or57dHbpjUIvBbIWy3R/kWxH3CW/V+W9oHV1vPIVlZB/UoNLCeRleukzsgWAEfjdIf1Q IIKw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533wNHsuwQlygdTTkcepuDAxjP4iAknl2WWuAC4JSLZNg8BZiN3k BW/bN1NHUNio7u1x8lMaZPtjNM+UkzoO4g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTrU4pUus2kB6vKHnIbzkZu2oV2j+v5hSIjC8VJCGXQN0ic+kyiIrD88Acj/VvrM+uGYAw9w== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:1009:: with SMTP id z9mr6830269qti.128.1616351170680; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:26:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scorpio.seibercom.net (cpe-174-109-231-236.nc.res.rr.com. [174.109.231.236]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h12sm9408561qko.29.2021.03.21.11.26.09 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:26:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (zeus.seibercom.net [192.168.1.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jerry@seibercom.net) by scorpio.seibercom.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4F3R0J3ZnZz20gS for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 14:26:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 14:25:53 -0400 From: Jerry To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OS to replace FreeBSD Message-ID: <20210321142553.000046d6@seibercom.net> In-Reply-To: References: <20210320132339.00004d9a@seibercom.net> <38EDD406-3EC4-4F71-B990-DDD1E753D091@kreme.com> <20210321113403.00004056@seibercom.net> <20210321120633.00004136@seibercom.net> Reply-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Organization: seibercom.net X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; i686-w64-mingw32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/0.1dktuT9X8j0UD+/j+eObY"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4F3R0N0JfQz3lmD X-Spamd-Bar: +++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=seibercom.net header.s=google header.b=VRbvQ66u; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of jerry@seibercom.net designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::831 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jerry@seibercom.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [3.07 / 15.00]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; GREYLIST(0.00)[pass,meta]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2607:f8b0:4000::/36]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[seibercom.net:+]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::831:from]; REPLYTO_EQ_TO_ADDR(5.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[seibercom.net:s=google]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[174.109.231.236:received]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.20)[multipart/signed,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[seibercom.net]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::831:from:127.0.2.255]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.67)[0.666]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::831:from]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-questions] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 18:26:13 -0000 --Sig_/0.1dktuT9X8j0UD+/j+eObY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:14:07 -0400, Aryeh Friedman stated: >On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 12:07 PM Jerry 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 =20 >> >> 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.=20 > >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. You are a complete asshole. The simple fact the the controller in question, and here I am assuming it is the controller, does not function correctly under FreeBSD, versions >=3D 11.x, but apparently does function under other OSs, is prima facie proof that it is not supported. I have seen zero proof that anyone is actively working on this phenomenon. The fact the the bug was first reported over a year ago would seem to indicate that it is not attracting any attention. The fact that it did work once under older versions reinforces my belief that someone screwed up the code in the newer versions. --=20 Jerry --Sig_/0.1dktuT9X8j0UD+/j+eObY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGzBAEBCAAdFiEELeCiu2K+9VmEYYgTgHBP8gv9FXcFAmBXj7gACgkQgHBP8gv9 FXegLwv/fzJvTHjtk2pNykc2GVGAEUeMlodHC39w4m/GztklHVJJ9sFV0dpmV5wT QZOpA219gxoiNsJl9gy/pAyeKPGntVHz1wRBbWxj66bZw9qkHRII0sSfhzZOY4uS jgyh/I59LTPFfoweLLg1ez1Yhe25kZ9zIQ8PEY4eoULUnktaG3uMShp6UaoEr8jI yyTzwC41/KTeS5+/2JYGpFwfoPSB2deVtocIwoZoBKD30BKV4YvUwOr9yRt/5OON aMK0T3BdSDdqB6gCqvfTYsN/Cxpa72JaBgFV3FuhD9m4S0b8suvINxw9Z7rJ2AHW 7R4YEE5D8DLoc1KC8/XmFQr/5gLpxkS6FUBUo1Hcr1c4EFr/78Bm5JeqkZRut3Xn 7Ew5p5/lLEyzqq6mIFdNAI89mLgl1jRD0PBBpKqDiOyknmAyNaJA65F50AMbob1E ++EWXOjEjEDUQOTECMUF2lkdL1LcVIGbvTk3V0HCMTGv5IeGLocTjBuuZP5RXDCI hHxTfMRG =4FQD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/0.1dktuT9X8j0UD+/j+eObY--