Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: MAKEOPTS values for Athlon 64 X2

[Harry Holt]

shouldn't this discussion go off-line?  or at least into another topic such
as 'rants on the openness of software'.  I think it has strayed a bit from
'MAKEOPTS values'.


On 1/18/07, Bob Young <BYoung@××××××××××.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: news [mailto:news@×××××××××.org]On Behalf Of Duncan
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 8:51 PM
> > To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o
> > Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: MAKEOPTS values for Athlon 64 X2
> >
> >
> > "Hemmann, Volker Armin" <volker.armin.hemmann@××××××××××××.de> posted
> > 200701172222.16480.volker.armin.hemmann@××××××××××××.de, excerpted
> below,
> > on  Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:22:16 +0100:
> >
> > > NVIDIA was made aware of a problem with our 1.0-8774 driver
> > that caused an X
> > > Server crash on July 2006 through a posting on nvnews.net.  The
> > problem was
> > > not identified as a security risk.
> >
> > This is the core of the problem, right here.
> >
> > As it happens, I don't personally have the skills to verify the
> > quality and security of the code.
>
> And neither do 99.999% of all computer users, whether they be MAC, Linux,
> or Windows users. That's what's at the core of the issue, and it's never
> goinig to change.
>
> In addition, the number of people who even *could* examine a given type of
> code (a video driver for example) and render a valid opinion as to it's
> quality is *extremely* small. Somone who writes database code for a living
> isn't going to have a clue about the details and intricacies of a video
> driver module. In fact even somone who writes drivers for another kernel
> sub-system (SCSI disk drivers for example) will probably quickly find
> themselves beyond their depth of understanding when examining 2D/3D/OpenGL
> video driver code.
>
> > However, that "someone I trust" is the FLOSS
> > community, including the authors willing to put their source code out
> > there for examination in the first place.
>
> Code from the OSS comunity has bugs and flaws just like code from the CSS
> comunity does, in fact they are often writen by the same people. If
> anything, it's likely that the CSS code is a bit more robust and better
> tested. CSS code in general (assuming the typical case of it being produced
> by a "company"), usually goes through more testing and a more formal Quality
> Assurance procedure than OSS. The quality, or lack there of for CSS, often
> has a direct effect on the finances of the vendor. That being the case, CSS
> vendors are inclined to go to a little extra trouble to keep obvious flaws
> out of their releases. On the OSS side of the equation there isn't any hard
> financial incentive to rigoriously regression test before posting a new
> release, because of the this and the real limitations described above, the
> mythical "many eyes" examining OSS code don't actually exist in any
> realistic sense.
>
>
> > By contrast, I do NOT trust
> > authors not willing to take that step,
>
> In the case we're talking about it's not actually the authors that aren't
> willing to publish their code, I'm sure that the authors are just as proud
> of their work as any OSS author is and would be perfectly willing to have it
> seen by anyone. It's the Company that feels the need to protect their
> intelectual property, and whether you, or RS, or anyone else, does or does
> not like it, they in fact have the right to do so. Also, IMO they also have
> a valid argument for doing so.
>
>
> > yet still require me to agree they
> > have no responsibility if the code doesn't work as intended if I choose
> to
> > use their programs, so I just choose not to make those agreements, and
> > consequently can't use their programs.
>
> You're certaintly free to make choices based on whatever criteria you feel
> like using, I just think that in the grand scheme of things the difference
> between using OSS and CSS is prety insignifiant. In the long run good apps,
> utilities, and hardware/drivers (whether OSS or CSS) will be successful, and
> the bad ones, (whether OSS or CSS), will fade away.
>
> The vast majority of users don't care whether what they are using is OSS
> or CSS, what they do, and should, care about is whether or not it works and
> does what they want. So while you're choice to use only OSS may give you
> personal satisfaction, in the long run it's not a choice that the vast
> majority of users are ever going to, or actually have any real need to
> consider.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Bob
>
>
>
> --
> gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list
>
>


-- 
Harry Holt, PMP