Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261219AbTIXCbM (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:31:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261249AbTIXCbM (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:31:12 -0400 Received: from smtp.bitmover.com ([192.132.92.12]:33925 "EHLO smtp.bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261219AbTIXCbK (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:31:10 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:29:48 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: andrea@kernel.org Cc: Larry McVoy , Linus Torvalds , Kernel Mailing List , Matthew Wilcox , Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: log-buf-len dynamic Message-ID: <20030924022948.GA6496@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , andrea@kernel.org, Larry McVoy , Linus Torvalds , Kernel Mailing List , Matthew Wilcox , Marcelo Tosatti References: <20030923221528.GP1269@velociraptor.random> <20030924003652.GI16314@velociraptor.random> <20030924011951.GA5615@work.bitmover.com> <20030924020409.GL16314@velociraptor.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030924020409.GL16314@velociraptor.random> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=0.3, required 7, AWL) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2453 Lines: 48 On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 04:04:09AM +0200, andrea@kernel.org wrote: > > What we expected in return was the same understanding. > > that is not accurate, you also asked us to giveup the freedom of > development in your area. If you were actually doing some significant development then maybe I'd respect you. But you aren't. So I don't. You don't have the slightest understanding in this area, you've proved that beyond all reasonable doubt. So you are just complaining about something you don't understand. I truly hope you follow in the footsteps of others who got pissed at the BK licensing and try to implement a replacement. BK makes VM systems seem like child's play. Centralized systems like CVS are child's play. Distributed systems like BK actually have to address all the problems that CVS ignores. Those problems are really hard. Not because they are so hard (even though they are), but because there are so many of them. It may be an eye opener to you if you realized that most of the problems that the researchers are discussing about distributed file systems, those are problems that we have solved. Computer science research is behind us. No kidding. Go get your best and bring 'em on, we'll take the challenge. There are at least a dozen excellent PhD theses in BK. And those are the ones I can think of at the end of a very long tiring day. If you understood that you'd understand why I am so unhappy with you. We've bent over backwards to give you what you need and you still don't understand what we have given you. You think it is something that you can fix in a few days of hacking. I'm reminded of something Peter Gutmann said recently: Whenever someone thinks that they can replace SSL/SSH with something much better that they designed this morning over coffee, their computer speakers should generate some sort of penis-shaped sound wave and plunge it repeatedly into their skulls until they achieve enlightenment. Change "SSL/SSH" to "useful source mangement" and it makes the point. I hope your skull hurts. It should. Enlightenment is then forthcoming. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/