Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:20:52 -0800 From: Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patch to teach config(8) about "platforms". Message-ID: <20030128222052.A26331@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20030129060515.GA1715@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net>; from marcel@xcllnt.net on Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 10:05:15PM -0800 References: <20030128174259.A10304@FreeBSD.org> <20030129021406.GD1016@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030128182013.A13422@FreeBSD.org> <20030129025124.GG1016@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030128190158.A15778@FreeBSD.org> <20030129044548.GI1016@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030128205737.A22274@FreeBSD.org> <20030129051853.GJ1016@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030128213716.A24203@FreeBSD.org> <20030129060515.GA1715@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* De: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> [ Data: 2003-01-28 ] [ Subjecte: Re: Patch to teach config(8) about "platforms". ] > On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 09:37:16PM -0800, Juli Mallett wrote: > > > > > but it explcitly means a location, a path. The introduction of > > > platform is more confusing. First of all it maps to MACHINE, > > > while we have the machine keyword mapping to something else. > > > > MACHINE is a cpp define and (relatedly) is defined by make(1), > > it isn't a config file element. Why do they have to be related > > just because they by coincidence have the same name? > > No, because using machine in your proposal would then be more > like what MACHINE_ARCH means everywhere else. There already is > confusion about the difference between MACHINE and MACHINE_ARCH > and you're only adding to that confusion by using machine in > the same way MACHINE_ARCH is used everywhere else. And by using machine in the same way it is used everywhere else. > > You don't like my choice of how, that's fine, > > you don't have to maintain a port which uses it. All the more reason > > for it to not be one that is even used by you at all. > > Blablabla. > > Your proposal affects FreeBSD. I'm having a constructive discussion > about your proposal because I like to understand your point of > view and tell you mine. Childish behaviour does not impress me. > In fact it only tells me that you're incapable of convincing me > and that you're incapable of looking at it from my point of view > and tell me where I'm missing something. No, you're fixated and > it took a lot of effort from my end to get to a point where we > understood each other. If you're tired of it, try an open mind > next time. No Marcel, I've been through your discussion already, with myself, when I first did this. I came up with the optimal way of doing it in my head, and considered all the possibilities. I also have to use it. What I was saying is that I have the need for it, and so I have had to deal with the implementation details. I've compared to every config utility I've worked with, and I've worked with the build systems of * that uses a similar mechanism, that I can get my hands on, and I prefer my way. I don't have the energy to go nowhere with you for a long time. I already went nowhere with me for a long time. I looked at it from your point of view months ago, and to make sure I didn't miss something, I looked at it from your point of view today, even made the necessary changes to the config(8) program to do it that way again, and tested it and so on. I did everything but draw out a map on a whiteboard (again). I used a piece of paper. Sorry if you find it childish to want to move on from that sort of rehashing. Not my intention, and I had no problem with our discussion. Only when I realised that you kept coming back to things I'd already been through, and I began to feel a bit over whelmed by the nature of the conversation, which was leaning towards bikeshedding, did I try to back out of it. I didn't go and give up when you were rehashing all this. When I gave up, I advised you to use your energy to come up with a working solution for this, and make it suit all the people who need it and will be affected by it, as I did. I don't doubt you could come up with something better over time, but I don't see why? If you happen to have something much, much better, please just get people to agree to it. As I have said, I already satisfied those affected (those who want to be affected), and I'm apparently not the only one who has an explicit preference of one way to the other (see what Benno has posted)... This isn't a matter of "who's more childish" or something, it's code, it's getting the job done, and making it possible to do the right thing. I'm sorry if that was how it seemed... And yes, I am incapable of convincing you, for now. Maybe if you spent the time on this problem I did, I could, or maybe if you had to deal with it, I could. Thanx, juli. -- Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> AIM: BSDFlata -- IRC: juli on EFnet OpenDarwin, Mono, FreeBSD Developer ircd-hybrid Developer, EFnet addict FreeBSD on MIPS-Anything on FreeBSD To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030128222052.A26331>