linux-mips-fnet
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SCSI & style of life

To: linux-mips@fnet.fr
Subject: Re: SCSI & style of life
From: Andreas Busse <andy@soft-n-hard.de>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:01:26 +0100
In-reply-to: <9511221346.ZM828@black.uni.net>
 > 
 > I understand perfectly. Yes, our motivations are different, and yours are the
 > strongest or at least the most practical ones. Such a difference will not be 
 > a
 > problem as long people won't promise anything that they can't deliver, and 
 > i've
 > payed much attention to not commit this error myself.
 > 

Well, I haven't had any problems with motivations yet. I just wanted
to make clear what mine are. Very practical ones, yes :-)

 > 
 > I think that the SNI thing, expecially under your point of view, is very 
 > good.
 > It is a germany based company and it shows as collaborative. Marketing 
 > chances
 > for theyr machines are much higher than for hybrid MIPS/PC we are hacking 
 > just
 > now, that are ~4 years old.
 > 

It should also be important for you all. Not that a port to the SNI baby
would make Linux/MIPS run better on a Magnum, but the project would get
attention. That's important.

 > You're probably right, and there is another problem: being the SNI a totally
 > different machine as i think is, the only common part among ARC compatibles 
 > and
 > SNI will be the (cross) developement env. and some higher level compatibility
 > layer, like libc, excutables and the ABI. This is very important stuff, we
 > can't really do anything without it. So my call is for:
 > 'A freezed devel. env. that works'.
 > I will release my gcc 2.7.0 binaries and libc 4.something UNLESS some serious
 > known bug prevents to do so. Then we can schedule the next release to let's 
 > say
 > four months. This will give to the people that work on it all the time to add
 > new features, fix the bugs, and release a comprensive source/binaries 
 > package.
 > I want to say my opinion about binaries distributions here. They are GOOD. A
 > great point of force for Linux is they large availability. Basically they 
 > allow
 > a fresh hacker, let's somebody that isn't yet very skilled about gnuism, unix
 > code and stuff, to gradually approach the system and it's complexity. Not
 > everybody is fascinated by the 'tools to make tools' paradigm, at least not 
 > at
 > the very starting point of a project.
 > 

100% agreed. A rule for releasing binaries should also be that binaries
should work on a broad range of Linux installations. That is (and I will
get kicked for this again): a.out is to be preferred. I've nothing
against ELF and Linux-1.3.x. But I cannot afford the downtime to move
to 1.3., at least not now. And I don't have a spare box to play with.

 > 
 > HOLYDAYS! .... apart jokes, if you feel you have to pass hand, it's ok. I'm
 > sure you will keep contributing to the whole. Let's find another working 
 > model
 > if not another coordinator, this is the place to talk about it, and this is 
 > the
 > time to do it. Comments, please.
 > 

It's not the case that I really want to change my responsibilities, I just
ask if someone wants that. I'd really prefer if some of the hackers 
around Ralf would hack the SNI port so that I can continue to keep
things moving where they seem to slow, and to stop things where they
seem to go in a wrong direction.

This afternoon I'll see Ralf and two other guys that are interested in
the SNI port. Let's see what happens...

Cheers,
Andy

-----------------------------------------------------------
Andreas Busse                      | andy@soft-n-hard.de
Soft N Hard GbR                    | Phone: +49 2636-970105
Im Hufen Boden 16, D-53498 Waldorf | Fax:   +49 2636-970106
-----------------------------------------------------------

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>