Re: Questions on the interoperability between libc, gnumach and hurd servers

[Svante Signell]

On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 13:47 +0200, Richard Braun wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:48:14PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:

> > > > > You've spent more than a year working on this system, and you
> > > > > still don't get the big picture of it, 
> > 
> > Maybe because the _reference_ manuals don't give the big picture, and
> > reading every detail of a function call, and all its variants makes you
> > fall asleep. Such information is very valuable but not as a learning
> > tool. Did you ever attend a class where the only course literature was a
> > reference manual, and no teachers/assistants to ask questions? I doubt
> > it.
> 
> The wiki isn't a reference manual.

No but the gnumach and Hurd ones are.

> > As I replied to Samuel, I'm not too fond of browsing web pages to find
> > information scattered in many places, not as an introduction to Hurd.
> > Where is the complete (tutorial) pdf to download and print out?
> 
> Idiot.

Now you called me names again. Learn to use decent language!

> > Now you have done it again, calling me names. Grow up! 
> > I am a teacher and don't _ever_ call them stupid even if i think so in
> > some cases. It's all about respect to other people. And I'm not lazy,
> > forget that.
> 
> I expected you to be a teacher, and i'm sorry for your students. Calling
> you names is a conscious way to express the degree of exasperation I'm
> feeling about you, not a childish reaction.

See above, and you are a recently graduated master student I assume. Not
many years of life experience yet.

> > Yes, if the rpc.mdwn was written and pointed early to the web page
> > things would be much more understandable. And this:
> > 
> > user_code <-> libc(client) <-> gnumach(mailman) <-> hurd(server)
> > 
> > gives me _much_ more than lengthy descriptions on details on the
> > gnumach/hurd functions. And there does not seem to exist any description
> > of the gnumach/Hurd parts of eglibc, right? I haven't found any.
> 
> Again, if you had read *anything* a bit serious about operating systems
> such as the Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system),
> you would have found a similar "graphical" diagram (like
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Operating_system_placement.svg). You
> would have learnt that the C library is linked to (almost) every program
> running on an operating system. And again, I'll use Wikipedia to
> demonstrate how easy it is to have a global view of a microkernel based
> system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microkernel.
> 
> Just do your homework first.

More links, thank you. I was hoping the hurd pages would be enough, but
obviously they are not. I offered to write something down and Samuel is
interested, but not you as it seems. What a pity.

> > See my reply to Samuel. I volunteer to write something down if there is
> > interest.
> 
> You'll just do it the same way you write patches: you'll write crap,
> asking others to review, many times, until it's actually right, and if
> people are too annoyed to answer you, you'll blame them for not doing
> anything to help, at which point you'll give up.

The number of iterations are not many nowadays. Now you are unfair. And
I haven't been giving up. Give some examples!

> > I'm rather fluent by now, most patches sent for review are granted by
> > either Samuel or Guillem. You don't seem to be a very frequent reviewer,
> > however.
> 
> They're faster to reply than I am. I wouldn't know the many mistakes you
> cause if I didn't review them.

Why don't you give feedback then? You can even do that on IRC.

> > I know that you are one of the few people doing _real_ development on
> > gnumach and Hurd, that is really appreciated. Please don't make this
> > discussion into a pie-throwing war. There are too few Hurd users and
> > developers for that.
> 
> Again, I hoped to keep it all between ourselves instead of making it
> public. That's your choice. Please don't answer this with additional
> nonsense just to have the last word.

I had to reply, because you are calling me names *AGAIN*, and that is
rude. Stop that!