1 |
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Ciaran McCreesh |
2 |
<ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
>> Once again, you do not support your argument with anything but your |
4 |
>> own word. Don't make me choke on the salt please :) |
5 |
> |
6 |
> Uhm. You're suggesting that the underlying issue is not a libtool |
7 |
> problem? Or you're suggesting that as-needed fixes the libtool bug? |
8 |
> Which basic fact that everyone discussing this should already know are |
9 |
> you disputing? |
10 |
|
11 |
I'm disputing your claim that fixing libtool is the correct solution |
12 |
*right now*, and that it's sanely doable in a reasonable time-frame. |
13 |
The former has been questioned by pretty much everyone else in the |
14 |
thread, and the latter is probably false since you don't just do it |
15 |
yourself. |
16 |
|
17 |
> |
18 |
>> Once again, rhetoric and insults without logic or reason. We all know |
19 |
>> you know that you need facts to convince people, but you're not |
20 |
>> providing any facts. One can only conclude that your purpose is not to |
21 |
>> convince. I honestly am baffled what purpose you have in mind. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> I expect people to do their homework and understand what we're |
24 |
> discussing. Do you expect me to start every post by explain what a |
25 |
> linker is? |
26 |
|
27 |
EDOESNOTMAKESENSE |
28 |
You said |
29 |
|
30 |
"[...]plenty of people are quite happy to jump in and yell when they |
31 |
don't have the slightest clue what the root problem is[...]" |
32 |
|
33 |
I replied saying that the paragraph was full of "rhetoric and insults |
34 |
without logic or reason". The latter part of the post is purely about |
35 |
how you're doing the same even where you should be talking with facts. |
36 |
|
37 |
Your reply seriously does not make sense to me. |
38 |
|
39 |
> |
40 |
>> > And unfortunately, it looks like those people are the ones that're |
41 |
>> > going to be making the decisions. |
42 |
>> |
43 |
>> Excellent, then you are free to point and laugh when we trip and fall. |
44 |
>> In the meantime, if you truly think everyone is making the wrong |
45 |
>> decision, talk with some facts and/or statistics. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> Fact: the underlying issue is a libtool bug. |
48 |
|
49 |
Fact: It can't be fixed easily and/or in a reasonable time-frame. Else |
50 |
someone would've done it -- heck you could've fixed it. |
51 |
|
52 |
> |
53 |
> Fact: as-needed does not fix this bug. It attempts to work around it. |
54 |
|
55 |
Fact: It works. Unlike your vapour-proposal to "fix libtool". |
56 |
|
57 |
> |
58 |
> Fact: as-needed breaks standard-compliant code. |
59 |
|
60 |
Fact: Breakages are rare, code which causes it is discouraged anyway, |
61 |
and is fixable in any case. We're not a standards organisation. |
62 |
|
63 |
> |
64 |
> Fact: fixing the libtool bug would give all the benefits purportedly |
65 |
> given by using as-needed, without the drawbacks. |
66 |
|
67 |
Fact: It hasn't been done forever, and won't be done anytime soon. |
68 |
|
69 |
> |
70 |
> It's quite simple, and if there're any of the above that you didn't |
71 |
> already know then why are you wasting everyone else's time discussing |
72 |
> things in this thread without doing some basic research first? |
73 |
|
74 |
It's quite simple, and you already knew all of the above, so why are |
75 |
you wasting everyone's time and energy discussing these things in this |
76 |
thread? |
77 |
|
78 |
Quite refreshing, seeing you type out your points in a clear manner |
79 |
for clearer rebuttal. I am going to assume that the matter is settled |
80 |
now. |
81 |
|
82 |
-- |
83 |
~Nirbheek Chauhan |
84 |
-- |
85 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |