BitKeeper licence critic

Joerg Schilling schilling at
Sat Mar 16 16:52:57 UTC 2002

>From jeroen at Sat Mar 16 17:22:42 2002

>On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 04:44:41PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>> >From jeroen at Sat Mar 16 15:41:29 2002
>> >Nice. Do you also fix the bugs in solaris if you find them?
>> There are much much less bug then in Linux. If I find a bug, I report it.

>And if they don't fix your reported bug? Or if it takes a month and
>you want to get something done which triggers that bug?

Well if it ets fixed in months on Solaris this is much much faster than 
on Linux or even other GNU tools.

Many of the important Linux bugs that create headakes for me are not fixed 
within years.

GNU make bugs are not fixed in years too. GNU make is still handling 
'include' statements wrong although I posted a bug report more than
3 years ago :-(

>> >Nobody force you. You've the freedom to do what you want, you don't
>> >*have to port*. If those people don't do the job well and those people
>> >want to run your software, they could a) fix there own things b)
>> >port your software so you only have to apply the patch.
>> People like you try to force me.=20

>I would write a patch, send it to you and try to convince to include
>it. I would not force you with a gun to apply the patch.

You tell me that it is bad habbit to use software that is not really free
and like to force me this way to spend more time to develop e.g. cdrecord.
Make Linux POSIX compliant enough and give me a useable debugger and
it may make sense to develop on Linux. As long as GDB only helps me with
things that don't need a debugger and does not support basic adb 
features it is useless.

Ever tried to find the reason for a core dump that is not easily pepeatable
and the program has not been compiled with -g?
Things that take seconds with adb cannot be done with gdb at all :-(

>Convincing !=3D forcing.

If you have arguments, you can convince me....

>I shouldn't? Does your program build and function correctly if
>PATH_MAX isn't defined? To give you an example: if the current working
>directory is bigger than 1024 the last part will be removed in

If you found a bug, comment it and send a usable and repeatable bug report.

>> also:
>> Did you already switch to star because GNUtar is nonstandard?

>I don't like the star interface and like the GNU tar one. I have never
>problems with the nonstandard format of GNU tar. Why should I switch
>to star if I don't like the program and don't have any problem with
>GNU tar?

Tht GNUtar command line systax is not POSIX compliant _and_ it is much
worse than the one from star. Nobody forces you to stay with the 
worse program but it seems that you don't like to read manual pages
and even try why star is easier to use than GNU tar.
I am usng star on a dayly base since 1984 (long before GNUtar exists).
If GNUtar would implement a better idea, I would copy it but there
is no reason to do so.

>> You are jumping with your mind frequently in order to express your wishes.
>> If you have a standpoint, you should be consequent.

>I am consequent. I like compatibility, but it's not the most important

If compatibility is less important for you then you don't take care 
of portability. Most GNU tools have initially been developed on SunOS
and have been used because they have been better than the tools
on SunOS. Now the maintainers in many cases dod loose contact to reality
because they are working on Linux only. For an evolving world you need

 EMail:joerg at (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at		(uni)  If you don't have iso-8859-1
       schilling at		(work) chars I am J"org Schilling
 FOKUS at CeBIT Hall 11, A14 - BerliOS at CeBIT Hall 11 D11 (Future Market)
 Meet me at CeBIT in Hall 11 D11 on the BerliOS booth -

More information about the Discussion mailing list