Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Ethan Benson <address@hidden>

    > On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 11:36:28PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
    > > > Patient: it hurts when I do [demonstrating by bending over backwards
    > > > to touch the backs of his knees] this
    > > > Doctor: then don't do that

    > > don't...share archives in a local filesystem?  That's a pretty major
    > > restriction, and it's something that CVS does fairly well if you're all
    > > in a Unix group.  arch should at least be able to match that.

    > not just a major restriction, its a completly ridiculous notion.

    > if you have shell access and use it, why should you be forced to go
    > through a slower transport when local fs access will work fine?

The bottleneck you are referring to is not very serious in practice.

    > > > It is an f'ed up notion that when the OS and environment provides
    > > > perfectly sufficient access controls that apps should do anything
    > > > more.

    > > But the OS and environment don't provide perfectly sufficient access
    > > controls, as Ethan, I, and others have shown.

    > i think its time we just implement my idea and advertise the patches,
    > then people who need this can just patch it, regardless of whether tom
    > likes it or not.  tla is free software afterall.

Yeah, that's a good plan.   After all, my instincts have been so
obviously bogus so far.  (Yes, kids, that's sarcasm.)

The thread originated a while back when the question arose about how
to host Xouvert on an unspecified host that has since (according to
IRC) been refined to savannah.

The admin policies on savannah are an apparent problem at the moment.

I believe there is a high probability that I can help fix those admin
policies, if you'll give me a chance.

But, by all means, feel free to shun the cooperative route and be a
jackass about it.....


-t