This mail archive is the complete (as far as I know) communication
between myself and the NetBSD core between December 15 (when they
removed all my NetBSD access) and the day OpenBSD was formed. It
actually goes a little further beyond that time, and includes mail
from a few other people involved in the negotiations.
This archive makes it clear that I tried everything I could to avoid
having to form a seperate project, but that the NetBSD core holds the
complete responsibility for the need and creation of OpenBSD, another
splinter group.
After my access was revokes, I struggled for 7 months to get access to
the CVS tree back. I was told to agree to things others did not have
to, to wait for an agreement document -- it's all in the archive. It
was suggested that I merge my 19,000 lines of diffs by mailing them to
an individual who would merge them. The entire affair was ridiculous.
Those people are
Charles Hannum
Chris Demetriou
JT Conklin
Paul Kranenburg
Adam Glass
There are newer NetBSD core members, but they have done nothing to
change the situation.
The mail contained in this archive is used under the principle of
`fair use' because my life and name have been massively affected by
the contents here-in. I have been personally slandered, and people
have been lied to about why OpenBSD exists. I religiously archive mail
now. It has gone so far that upon visiting companies in Silicon Valley,
I have met people who said they'd heard of something bad in association
with my name.
If anything is missing from this archive feel free to send it to me.
I would love to have and incorporate anything else. As far as I know
this archive is complete, but.. things slip sometimes. I have left out
many pieces which I cannot forward without compromising the person who
forwarded me the mail; I have left nothing out that I sent or core sent
to me.
The NetBSD core have read this document; I have ftp archives to show so.
They have never made any direct comment on it, but people have told me
that they got very angry.
An earlier version of this archive was unsorted, and difficult to
track. I wish this was easier to follow, but it is lengthy.
To read this in order, do:
more ? ?? ???
Start of archive
# This is a shell archive. Save it in a file, remove anything before
# this line, and then unpack it by entering "sh file". Note, it may
# create directories; files and directories will be owned by you and
# have default permissions.
#
# This archive contains:
#
# 1
# 2
# 3
# 4
# 5
# 6
# 7
# 8
# 9
# 10
# 11
# 12
# 13
# 14
# 15
# 16
# 17
# 18
# 19
# 20
# 21
# 22
# 23
# 24
# 25
# 26
# 27
# 28
# 29
# 30
# 31
# 32
# 33
# 34
# 35
# 36
# 37
# 38
# 39
# 40
# 41
# 42
# 43
# 44
# 45
# 46
# 47
# 48
# 49
# 50
# 51
# 52
# 53
# 54
# 55
# 56
# 57
# 58
# 59
# 60
# 61
# 62
# 63
# 64
# 65
# 66
# 67
# 68
# 69
# 70
# 71
# 72
# 73
# 74
# 75
# 76
# 77
# 78
# 79
# 80
# 81
# 82
# 83
# 84
# 85
# 86
# 87
# 88
# 89
# 90
# 91
# 92
# 93
# 94
# 95
# 96
# 97
# 98
# 99
# 100
# 101
# 102
# 103
# 104
# 105
# 106
# 107
# 108
# 109
# 110
# 111
# 112
# 113
# 114
# 115
# 116
# 117
# 118
# 119
# 120
# 121
# 122
# 123
# 124
# 125
# 126
# 127
# 128
# 129
# 130
# 131
# 132
# 133
# 134
#
echo x - 1
sed 's/^X//' >1 << 'END-of-1'
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by fsa.ca (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA14296; Tue, 20 Dec 94 06:46:27 MST
XMessage-Id: <9412201346.AA14296@fsa.ca>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa28111;
X 20 Dec 94 8:45 EST
XTo: deraadt@fsa.ca
XCc: cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU, core@netbsd.org
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1994, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XDate: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 08:45:43 -0500
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
XTheo,
X
XOver the past year and a half, we have received a considerable number
Xof complaints about the fact that you seem to harass and abuse both
Xusers and developers of NetBSD. At various times, some of us have
Xsuggested (with varying levels of severity) that you cease this
Xbehaviour, but this has been ineffective. Indeed, you have given us
Xscant reason to believe that your behaviour is ever going to change
Xfor the better.
X
XYour abusive actions have seriously impaired the success of the NetBSD
Xproject in several ways. Your actions have driven away developers or
Xpotential developers, and have alienated many users. They have also
Xsquandered much of the good will that various people have directed at
Xthe project.
X
XFinally, it is clear that for the project to be a success, we must
Xpromote a positive environment for both users and developers. If we
Xcontinue to allow you, an official representative of the NetBSD
Xproject, to behave in this manner, we create the perception that we
Xapprove of your behaviour. That perception is damaging to the project
Xand cannot be allowed to persist.
X
X
XBecause of these things, we believe that it would be in the best
Xinterest of the NetBSD project if you were to resign all official
Xassociation with the project. We request that you resign from the
XNetBSD core team, resign as the maintainer of the NetBSD SPARC port,
Xand post a message to the "netbsd-users", "current-users", and
X"port-sparc" mailing lists announcing your resignation. If you choose
Xnot to post such an announcement within one day (by 9:00AM, 12/21/94),
Xwe will be forced to inform the public about your removal from the
Xorganization ourselves.
X
XWe regret having to do this, because you have done a significant
Xamount of very good work for the project. In spite of that, we can no
Xlonger condone your behaviour. We wish for this parting to be as
Xpainless as possible; we have disabled your accounts on the NetBSD
Xdevelopment machines and have removed you from the "core" and
X"port-masters" mailing lists, but have left your subscriptions to
Xother NetBSD mailing lists untouched. We have no objection to your
Xfurther participation in NetBSD, as long as you participate in a
Xmature manner and make clear the fact that you no longer officially
Xrepresent the NetBSD Project.
X
X
XThank you for your cooperation.
X
X
XThe NetBSD Core Group (in alphabetical order)
XJ.T. Conklin
XChris Demetriou
XAdam Glass
XCharles Hannum
XPaul Kranenburg
END-of-1
echo x - 2
sed 's/^X//' >2 << 'END-of-2'
XReturn-Path: owner-netbsd-users@NetBSD.ORG
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from pain.lcs.mit.edu by fsa.ca (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA06529; Fri, 23 Dec 94 12:35:37 MST
XReceived: (from daemon@localhost) by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id NAA02744 for netbsd-users-outgoing; Fri, 23 Dec 1994 13:20:15 -0500
XReceived: from sun-lamp.cs.berkeley.edu by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id NAA02740 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 1994 13:20:11 -0500
XReceived: from LOCALHOST (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by sun-lamp.cs.berkeley.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA15135 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 1994 11:26:10 -0800
XMessage-Id: <199412231926.LAA15135@sun-lamp.cs.berkeley.edu>
XX-Authentication-Warning: sun-lamp.cs.berkeley.edu: Host LOCALHOST didn't use HELO protocol
XTo: netbsd-users@NetBSD.ORG
XSubject: Theo De Raadt
XDate: Fri, 23 Dec 1994 11:26:09 -0800
XFrom: Adam Glass
XSender: owner-netbsd-users@NetBSD.ORG
XPrecedence: list
XX-Loop: netbsd-users@NetBSD.ORG
XStatus: O
X
X
XOn December 20, Theo de Raadt was asked to resign from the NetBSD
XProject by the remaining members of 'core'. This was a very difficult
Xdecision to make, and resulted from Theo's long history of rudeness
Xtowards and abuse of users and developers of NetBSD. We believe that
Xthere is no place for that type of behaviour from representatives
Xof the NetBSD Project, and that, overall, it has been damaging to the
Xproject.
X
XThis decision was difficult to make because Theo has a long history of
Xpositive contributions to the project. He was the principal caretaker
Xof NetBSD's SPARC support, and has written too much code to mention.
XWe are certainly willing to accept (and would very much like to see)
Xfuture contributions from Theo, but we believe that it is
Xinappropriate for him to be an "official" representative of the
Xproject any longer.
X
XPlease direct replies to core@NetBSD.ORG.
X
Xlater,
XAdam Glass
END-of-2
echo x - 3
sed 's/^X//' >3 << 'END-of-3'
XReturn-Path: pk@cs.few.eur.nl
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from fsa.ca (newt.fsa.ca) by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA05948; Sat, 11 Feb 95 14:00:59 MST
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl (kaa.cs.few.eur.nl) by fsa.ca (4.1/fsa1.0)
X id AA09018; Sat, 11 Feb 95 14:00:51 MST
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA10381; Sat, 11 Feb 95 22:00:44 +0100
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9502112100.AA10381@cs.few.eur.nl>
XSubject:
XTo: deraadt@fsa.ca (Theo de Raadt)
XDate: Sat, 11 Feb 1995 22:00:43 +0100 (MET)
XIn-Reply-To: <9412091853.AA04560@fsa.ca> from "Theo de Raadt" at Dec 9, 94 11:53:39 am
XX-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13]
XMime-Version: 1.0
XContent-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
XContent-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
XContent-Length: 374
X
XHello Theo,
X
XI hope you're not too bothered receiving mail from me, bit I do feel
XI should communicate.
X
XI hear from Chuck you keep on doing bits on the sparc port and I was
Xpleased to hear it. Actually, `relieved' is even a better description.
X
XWell, that's all I wanted to say at the moment really. Whatever your
Xfeelings may be, I just had to get this off my chest.
X
X-pk
END-of-3
echo x - 4
sed 's/^X//' >4 << 'END-of-4'
XReplied: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 11:55:23 -0700
XReplied: "Paul Kranenburg "
XReturn-Path: pk@cs.few.eur.nl
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl (kaa.cs.few.eur.nl) by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA07789; Mon, 13 Mar 95 02:20:06 MST
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA17760; Mon, 13 Mar 95 10:20:08 +0100
XDate: Mon, 13 Mar 95 10:20:08 +0100
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9503130920.AA17760@cs.few.eur.nl>
XTo: deraadt@theos.com
X
XYou know, communication between you and me has mostly been routed through
XChuck until now. I've responded to remarks that have reached me by responding
Xto Chuck again. I will no longer do this as this is not at all helpful when it
Xcomes to knowing what has been said when and by whom. I suggest we talk
Xdirectly; this is the only way repairs can be achieved anyway.
X
X
XIn reponse to your remark on cvs access, I replied that you cannot expect
Xthis to happen without you and all of core talking to eachother in a
Xcollected and rational fashion. Chris has responded in a similar way.
XI also said that I do *not* expect you to seek "absolution" in case you would
Xbe interpreting "we need to talk first, and that might take some time" that
Xway. To repeat myself, it just means: restore normal contacts with all of us,
Xand things will work out one way or another. What *more* can I say?
XThis will also enable coordination on actual technical work being done
X(re: the scsi thing), which is a highly unfortunate incident that I feel
Xcould have easily been avoided by getting in touch with *me* (as the
Xsparc port maintainer, and not as anything else).
X
X-pk
X
XPS. I want to express my thanks to Chuck for acting as a moderator in the last
Xmonths. I surely hope it will pay off.
END-of-4
echo x - 5
sed 's/^X//' >5 << 'END-of-5'
XReplied: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 14:28:07 -0700
XReplied: "Paul Kranenburg "
XReplied: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 14:10:59 -0700
XReplied: "Paul Kranenburg "
XReturn-Path: pk@cs.few.eur.nl
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl (kaa.cs.few.eur.nl) by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA10988; Mon, 13 Mar 95 13:58:38 MST
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA15700; Mon, 13 Mar 95 21:58:39 +0100
XDate: Mon, 13 Mar 95 21:58:39 +0100
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9503132058.AA15700@cs.few.eur.nl>
XTo: deraadt@theos.com
X
X> It is therefore VERY hard for me to get back up to talking about
X> non-technical things. Such a hardline attitude has hurt my feelings
X> too much.
X>
X> [..]
X> And how would you characterize such a "normal contact"?
X>
XTalk about just technical things then, if you feel like it. I would
Xappreciate that, and I'm sure others would too.
X
X
X> I'm still shocked that anyone should be at all annoyed or even worried
X> that I did a scsi driver for kicks, for myself and for Chuck. There
X> isn't any reason why I should have let you know -- really. I did it
X> for my own pleasure, and at this stage in the game the diffs between
X> what I have in my tree are so large that it might as well be a
X> different tree. I seriously did consider creating a new *BSD
X> distribution just over a month ago, but bandwidth limits me. Have you
X> forgotten why I work on this stuff? For fun. I cannot believe anyone
X> was foolish enough to expect I'd tell them about something I was
X> writing for fun.
X>
XAnd what do you think _I_ do it for? For fun. Why do you think I excepted
Xbeing port-master now, while I'm already swamped with other work? Because I
Xcare, and like to see NetBSD become a success. Nobody forces me. Neither
Xdoes anybody force you or Chuck or anyone else. You either feel like
Xcontributing or you don't. If you are, then I feel it is a natural
Xconsequence to let the port-master do a little bit of co-ordinating...
XApperently, if such co-ordination is temporarily ineffective, for whatever
Xreason, people sometimes do come down inappropriately hard on eachother. (sigh)
X
X> [...]
X> I don't mean to be rude, but I must be direct -- how could you even
X> have stood by and let such a thing happen?
X>
X
XI'll be direct too: don't indulge yourself into thinking that "core" or
Xanyone else is ganging up against you. It is simply not true. I don't
Xfeel like analyzing everything that's happened, again. What I *do* know
Xis that it's possible to draw a line and start again and hope for the best.
XAnd I can say this with some authority 'cause I've had to so myself in
Xthe past...
X
END-of-5
echo x - 6
sed 's/^X//' >6 << 'END-of-6'
XReturn-Path: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from pain.lcs.mit.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA13003; Thu, 20 Apr 95 12:26:11 MDT
XReceived: (from daemon@localhost) by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id NAA11422 for port-sparc-outgoing; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 13:05:58 -0400
XReceived: from duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id NAA11412 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 13:05:46 -0400
XReceived: (from mycroft@localhost) by duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (8.6.10/8.6.10) id NAA09242; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 13:05:37 -0400
XDate: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 13:05:37 -0400
XMessage-Id: <199504201705.NAA09242@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
XFrom: "Charles M. Hannum"
XTo: johns@cs.umr.edu
XCc: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XIn-Reply-To: <199504201639.LAA01874@orion.cs.umr.edu> (message from John Stone on Thu, 20 Apr 1995 11:39:45 -0500 (CDT))
XSubject: Re: Sparc 20 ?
XSender: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XPrecedence: list
XX-Loop: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
X
X
X Does anyone else even _care_ about having working 4/x00 code???
X
XCertainly. However, there's a reason Theo doesn't have direct access
Xto the CVS tree, and it's not appropriate to discuss it publically.
X
END-of-6
echo x - 7
sed 's/^X//' >7 << 'END-of-7'
XReturn-Path: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from pain.lcs.mit.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA13676; Thu, 20 Apr 95 13:45:21 MDT
XReceived: (from daemon@localhost) by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id OAA11739 for port-sparc-outgoing; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:15:11 -0400
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA11735 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:15:03 -0400
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA21100; Thu, 20 Apr 95 20:14:59 +0200
XDate: Thu, 20 Apr 95 20:14:59 +0200
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9504201814.AA21100@cs.few.eur.nl>
XTo: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG, johns@cs.umr.edu
XSubject: Re: Sparc 20 ?
XSender: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XPrecedence: list
XX-Loop: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
X
X> Does anyone else even _care_ about having working 4/x00 code???
X
XI certainly care. Just make it available..
X
X> So there it is. Flame me if you must, but after spending a TON of my time
X> helping debug, test, and write fixes for the 4/x00 machines, I want to
X> see it in the tree!
X
XAgain, I'd be perfectly happy to put your contributions in the tree, and
Xthere are ways to get them there: there's the port-sparc mailing list
Xand portmaster's email address to name just two. Now, it's just possible
Xthat those aren't really practical for the stuff you have at hand. In
Xthat case we'll have to think of something else. I'll be in touch.
END-of-7
echo x - 8
sed 's/^X//' >8 << 'END-of-8'
XReplied: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 15:32:44 -0600
XReplied: "Paul Kranenburg johns@cs.umr.edu, chuck@theos.com, deraadt@theos.com"
XReturn-Path: pk@cs.few.eur.nl
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl (kaa.cs.few.eur.nl) by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA13746; Thu, 20 Apr 95 14:03:17 MDT
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA02587; Thu, 20 Apr 95 22:03:22 +0200
XDate: Thu, 20 Apr 95 22:03:22 +0200
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9504202003.AA02587@cs.few.eur.nl>
XTo: johns@cs.umr.edu
XSubject: your 4/100 code
XCc: chuck@theos.com, deraadt@theos.com
X
X
XTo follow up on this: do you have suggestions to get this rolling?
X
XOne to start with: I can set up an account on my NetBSD/sparc machine for
Xyou and Chuck (Theo already has one) with access to the local source tree;
Xthat way, you can patch things yourself and easily signal me about them.
XIt saves you from making diffs and saves me from having to apply them.
X
X-pk
END-of-8
echo x - 9
sed 's/^X//' >9 << 'END-of-9'
XReturn-Path: deraadt@theos.com
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from localhost.theos.com by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA14348; Thu, 20 Apr 95 15:56:55 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9504202156.AA14348@theos.com>
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: Paul Kranenburg , johns@cs.umr.edu, chuck@theos.com
XSubject: Re: your 4/100 code
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 20 Apr 1995 15:32:44 MDT."
X <9504202132.AA14145@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 15:56:54 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> > To follow up on this: do you have suggestions to get this rolling?
X> >
X> > One to start with: I can set up an account on my NetBSD/sparc machine for
X> > you and Chuck (Theo already has one) with access to the local source tree;
X> > that way, you can patch things yourself and easily signal me about them.
X> > It saves you from making diffs and saves me from having to apply them.
X>
X> Paul, I want CVS access on sun-lamp.
X
XThey key is that I've been asking for "cvs log", and "cvs diff" access
Xfor quite some time now. That is what I need. And once those are
Xgiven, I might as well be given "cvs commit" access.
X
XI am really surprised that you would offer so little after 3 months of
Xtalking about and around this.
END-of-9
echo x - 10
sed 's/^X//' >10 << 'END-of-10'
XReturn-Path: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from pain.lcs.mit.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA15886; Thu, 20 Apr 95 19:37:39 MDT
XReceived: (from daemon@localhost) by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id TAA15941 for port-sparc-outgoing; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 19:18:31 -0400
XReceived: from duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id TAA15905 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 19:17:56 -0400
XReceived: (from mycroft@localhost) by duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (8.6.10/8.6.10) id TAA10878; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 19:17:48 -0400
XDate: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 19:17:48 -0400
XMessage-Id: <199504202317.TAA10878@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
XFrom: "Charles M. Hannum"
XTo: rhealey@kas.helios.mn.org
XCc: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XIn-Reply-To: <199504202201.RAA05385@kas.helios.mn.org> (rhealey@kas.helios.mn.org)
XSubject: Re: Sparc 20 ?
XSender: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XPrecedence: list
XX-Loop: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
X
X
X > Does anyone else even _care_ about having working 4/x00 code???
X >
X Yes, there are probably quite a few of us out here that
X could make use of it.
X
X > Certainly. However, there's a reason Theo doesn't have direct access
X > to the CVS tree, and it's not appropriate to discuss it publically.
X >
X [...]
X
X Just my insignificant little opinion... Let's put it in and work
X with it like we do on all the other ports! That's what NetBSD is
X all about, or at least I thought that's what NetBSD is about.
X
XYou're confusing two issues. Theo does not currently have direct
Xaccess to the CVS tree, but he has always been welcome to contribute
Xto NetBSD, if he so chooses.
X
END-of-10
echo x - 11
sed 's/^X//' >11 << 'END-of-11'
XReturn-Path: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from pain.lcs.mit.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA15989; Thu, 20 Apr 95 19:49:31 MDT
XReceived: (from daemon@localhost) by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id UAA16822 for port-sparc-outgoing; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:16:04 -0400
XReceived: from duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA16818 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:16:01 -0400
XReceived: (from mycroft@localhost) by duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (8.6.10/8.6.10) id UAA11247; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:15:47 -0400
XDate: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:15:47 -0400
XMessage-Id: <199504210015.UAA11247@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
XFrom: "Charles M. Hannum"
XTo: miguel@roxanne.nuclecu.unam.mx
XCc: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XSubject: Re: 4/X00 support from theo (Was: Sparc 20 ?)
XSender: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XPrecedence: list
XX-Loop: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
X
X
X [...] to the people that want Theo back on the developement of
X NetBSD, [...]
X
XI think that sums up the misunderstanding here. We have *no*
Xobjection to Theo contributing to NetBSD. We never have. We were
Xquite explicit about this in our contact with Theo. The only person
Xwho needs to decide whether and how Theo will contribute to NetBSD is
XTheo himself.
X
X From a couple a messages I received to my request of knowing why
X the NetBSD core team did not let Theo had access to the CVS tree,
X it seems like the core team of the NetBSD took the decision of
X leaving Theo out of the developement group because he was being
X rude with other people related to NetBSD and because it was
X "damaging to the project" in terms of social relationships.
X
X1) He is explicitly *not* excluded from the `development group'. The
Xway most people contribute to the project is by sending changes to the
X`maintainer' of the code they've worked on, or submitting them with
X`send-pr', and he's welcome to do the same.
X
X2) Our action (which was actually several months ago) had nothing to
Xdo with `social relationships'.
X
X The free software world is already too fragmented to lose a good
X programmer just because he was not nice with other people (and as
X I understand Theo was being bothered constantly by the user that
X complained about the rudeness of Theo).
X
X3) It was not a single user, or a single incident, and it occured over
Xa long period of time.
X
X If you don't want Theo as an official
X speaker of the NetBSD team, it's should be ok for most people on
X this list, just gave him access to the source tree.
X
X4) He does have access to the source tree, in the same way as most
Xother contributors.
X
X
XI think it's reasonably clear that only people in the `core' group
Xknow the details of this, and we consider much of the information to
Xbe confidential.
X
END-of-11
echo x - 12
sed 's/^X//' >12 << 'END-of-12'
XReturn-Path: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from pain.lcs.mit.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA15853; Thu, 20 Apr 95 19:29:07 MDT
XReceived: (from daemon@localhost) by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id UAA16960 for port-sparc-outgoing; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:31:43 -0400
XReceived: from duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA16956 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:31:41 -0400
XReceived: (from mycroft@localhost) by duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (8.6.10/8.6.10) id UAA11300; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:31:39 -0400
XDate: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:31:39 -0400
XMessage-Id: <199504210031.UAA11300@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
XFrom: "Charles M. Hannum"
XTo: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XSubject: Read me!
XSender: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XPrecedence: list
XX-Loop: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
X
X
XPlease note that the description of this list is:
X
X Technical discussion regarding NetBSD/sparc
X
XDiscussion not directly related to the NetBSD/sparc port and/or not
Xtechnically oriented is not appropriate, and should be taken
Xelsewhere.
X
XIn particular, if you have questions about something the `core' group
Xhas done, you should mail them to `core@netbsd.org'.
X
END-of-12
echo x - 13
sed 's/^X//' >13 << 'END-of-13'
XTo: cgd@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: ypbind hack
XDate: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 00:12:28 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xplease send me the diff for that ypbind hack.
Xthanks
END-of-13
echo x - 14
sed 's/^X//' >14 << 'END-of-14'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: ypbind hack
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 21 Apr 1995 02:19:23 EDT."
X <9504210620.AA17430@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 00:37:29 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
XI think I have a better fix, but have not tested it yet. It manages the
Xxid -> dom translation table better.
END-of-14
echo x - 15
sed 's/^X//' >15 << 'END-of-15'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: ypbind hack
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 21 Apr 1995 02:48:52 EDT."
X <9504210649.AA17625@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 01:09:49 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xtry this. it might work, it might not. i can't test it in the situation you
Xhave. but it attempts to map xid's to ypdb's more carefully, then to domain
Xnames.
X
Xof course, it's a whole file because I cannot do diffs. in fact, i lost the
Xoriginal file, and edited it twice so my emacs ~ file is mangled....
X
X
X/*
X * Copyright (c) 1992, 1993 Theo de Raadt
X * All rights reserved.
X *
X * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
X * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
X * are met:
X * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
X * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
X * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
X * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
X * documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
X * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
X * must display the following acknowledgement:
X * This product includes software developed by Theo de Raadt.
X * 4. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote
X * products derived from this software without specific prior written
X * permission.
X *
X * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS
X * OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED
X * WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
X * ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY
X * DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
X * DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
X * OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
X * HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
X * LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
X * OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
X * SUCH DAMAGE.
X */
X
X#ifndef LINT
Xstatic char rcsid[] = "$Id: ypbind.c,v 1.18 1995/01/15 09:09:30 mycroft Exp $";
X#endif
X
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X#include
X
X#define BINDINGDIR "/var/yp/binding"
X#define YPBINDLOCK "/var/run/ypbind.lock"
X
Xstruct _dom_binding {
X struct _dom_binding *dom_pnext;
X char dom_domain[YPMAXDOMAIN + 1];
X struct sockaddr_in dom_server_addr;
X unsigned short int dom_server_port;
X int dom_socket;
X CLIENT *dom_client;
X long int dom_vers;
X time_t dom_check_t;
X time_t dom_ask_t;
X int dom_lockfd;
X int dom_alive;
X int dom_xid;
X};
X
Xextern bool_t xdr_domainname(), xdr_ypbind_resp();
Xextern bool_t xdr_ypreq_key(), xdr_ypresp_val();
Xextern bool_t xdr_ypbind_setdom();
X
Xchar *domainname;
X
Xstruct _dom_binding *ypbindlist;
Xint check;
X
X#define YPSET_NO 0
X#define YPSET_LOCAL 1
X#define YPSET_ALL 2
Xint ypsetmode = YPSET_NO;
X
Xint rpcsock, pingsock;
Xstruct rmtcallargs rmtca;
Xstruct rmtcallres rmtcr;
Xchar rmtcr_outval;
Xu_long rmtcr_port;
XSVCXPRT *udptransp, *tcptransp;
X
Xvoid *
Xypbindproc_null_2(transp, argp, clnt)
X SVCXPRT *transp;
X void *argp;
X CLIENT *clnt;
X{
X static char res;
X
X memset(&res, 0, sizeof(res));
X return (void *)&res;
X}
X
Xstruct ypbind_resp *
Xypbindproc_domain_2(transp, argp, clnt)
X SVCXPRT *transp;
X char *argp;
X CLIENT *clnt;
X{
X static struct ypbind_resp res;
X struct _dom_binding *ypdb;
X char path[MAXPATHLEN];
X time_t now;
X
X memset(&res, 0, sizeof res);
X res.ypbind_status = YPBIND_FAIL_VAL;
X
X for (ypdb = ypbindlist; ypdb; ypdb = ypdb->dom_pnext)
X if (!strcmp(ypdb->dom_domain, argp))
X break;
X
X if (ypdb == NULL) {
X ypdb = (struct _dom_binding *)malloc(sizeof *ypdb);
X memset(ypdb, 0, sizeof *ypdb);
X strncpy(ypdb->dom_domain, argp, sizeof ypdb->dom_domain);
X ypdb->dom_vers = YPVERS;
X ypdb->dom_alive = 0;
X ypdb->dom_lockfd = -1;
X sprintf(path, "%s/%s.%d", BINDINGDIR, ypdb->dom_domain, ypdb->dom_vers);
X unlink(path);
X ypdb->dom_pnext = ypbindlist;
X ypbindlist = ypdb;
X check++;
X return NULL;
X }
X
X if (ypdb->dom_alive == 0)
X return NULL;
X
X#ifdef HEURISTIC
X time(&now);
X if (now < ypdb->dom_ask_t + 5) {
X /*
X * Hmm. More than 2 requests in 5 seconds have indicated
X * that my binding is possibly incorrect.
X * Ok, do an immediate poll of the server.
X */
X if (ypdb->dom_check_t >= now) {
X /* don't flood it */
X ypdb->dom_check_t = 0;
X check++;
X }
X }
X ypdb->dom_ask_t = now;
X#endif
X
Xanswer:
X res.ypbind_status = YPBIND_SUCC_VAL;
X res.ypbind_respbody.ypbind_bindinfo.ypbind_binding_addr.s_addr =
X ypdb->dom_server_addr.sin_addr.s_addr;
X res.ypbind_respbody.ypbind_bindinfo.ypbind_binding_port =
X ypdb->dom_server_port;
X /*printf("domain %s at %s/%d\n", ypdb->dom_domain,
X inet_ntoa(ypdb->dom_server_addr.sin_addr),
X ntohs(ypdb->dom_server_addr.sin_port));*/
X return &res;
X}
X
Xbool_t *
Xypbindproc_setdom_2(transp, argp, clnt)
X SVCXPRT *transp;
X struct ypbind_setdom *argp;
X CLIENT *clnt;
X{
X struct sockaddr_in *fromsin, bindsin;
X static bool_t res;
X
X memset(&res, 0, sizeof(res));
X fromsin = svc_getcaller(transp);
X
X switch (ypsetmode) {
X case YPSET_LOCAL:
X if (fromsin->sin_addr.s_addr != htonl(INADDR_LOOPBACK))
X return (bool_t *)NULL;
X break;
X case YPSET_ALL:
X break;
X case YPSET_NO:
X default:
X return (bool_t *)NULL;
X }
X
X if (ntohs(fromsin->sin_port) >= IPPORT_RESERVED)
X return &res;
X
X if (argp->ypsetdom_vers != YPVERS)
X return &res;
X
X memset(&bindsin, 0, sizeof bindsin);
X bindsin.sin_family = AF_INET;
X bindsin.sin_len = sizeof(bindsin);
X bindsin.sin_addr = argp->ypsetdom_addr;
X bindsin.sin_port = argp->ypsetdom_port;
X rpc_received(argp->ypsetdom_domain, &bindsin, 1);
X
X res = 1;
X return &res;
X}
X
Xstatic void
Xypbindprog_2(rqstp, transp)
X struct svc_req *rqstp;
X register SVCXPRT *transp;
X{
X union {
X char ypbindproc_domain_2_arg[MAXHOSTNAMELEN];
X struct ypbind_setdom ypbindproc_setdom_2_arg;
X } argument;
X struct authunix_parms *creds;
X char *result;
X bool_t (*xdr_argument)(), (*xdr_result)();
X char *(*local)();
X
X switch (rqstp->rq_proc) {
X case YPBINDPROC_NULL:
X xdr_argument = xdr_void;
X xdr_result = xdr_void;
X local = (char *(*)()) ypbindproc_null_2;
X break;
X
X case YPBINDPROC_DOMAIN:
X xdr_argument = xdr_domainname;
X xdr_result = xdr_ypbind_resp;
X local = (char *(*)()) ypbindproc_domain_2;
X break;
X
X case YPBINDPROC_SETDOM:
X switch (rqstp->rq_cred.oa_flavor) {
X case AUTH_UNIX:
X creds = (struct authunix_parms *)rqstp->rq_clntcred;
X if (creds->aup_uid != 0) {
X svcerr_auth(transp, AUTH_BADCRED);
X return;
X }
X break;
X default:
X svcerr_auth(transp, AUTH_TOOWEAK);
X return;
X }
X
X xdr_argument = xdr_ypbind_setdom;
X xdr_result = xdr_void;
X local = (char *(*)()) ypbindproc_setdom_2;
X break;
X
X default:
X svcerr_noproc(transp);
X return;
X }
X memset(&argument, 0, sizeof(argument));
X if (!svc_getargs(transp, xdr_argument, (caddr_t)&argument)) {
X svcerr_decode(transp);
X return;
X }
X result = (*local)(transp, &argument, rqstp);
X if (result != NULL && !svc_sendreply(transp, xdr_result, result)) {
X svcerr_systemerr(transp);
X }
X return;
X}
X
Xmain(argc, argv)
X int argc;
X char *argv[];
X{
X char path[MAXPATHLEN];
X struct timeval tv;
X fd_set fdsr;
X int width, lockfd;
X int evil = 0, one;
X
X yp_get_default_domain(&domainname);
X if (domainname[0] == '\0') {
X fprintf(stderr, "domainname not set. Aborting.\n");
X exit(1);
X }
X
X while (--argc) {
X ++argv;
X if (!strcmp("-ypset", *argv))
X ypsetmode = YPSET_ALL;
X else if (!strcmp("-ypsetme", *argv))
X ypsetmode = YPSET_LOCAL;
X }
X
X /* blow away everything in BINDINGDIR */
X
X#ifdef O_SHLOCK
X if ((lockfd = open(YPBINDLOCK, O_CREAT|O_SHLOCK|O_RDWR|O_TRUNC, 0644)) == -1) {
X fprintf(stderr, "ypbind: cannot create %s\n", YPBINDLOCK);
X exit(1);
X }
X#else
X if ((lockfd = open(YPBINDLOCK, O_CREAT|O_RDWR|O_TRUNC, 0644)) == -1) {
X fprintf(stderr, "ypbind: cannot create %s\n", YPBINDLOCK);
X exit(1);
X }
X flock(lockfd, LOCK_SH);
X#endif
X
X (void)pmap_unset(YPBINDPROG, YPBINDVERS);
X
X udptransp = svcudp_create(RPC_ANYSOCK);
X if (udptransp == NULL) {
X fprintf(stderr, "cannot create udp service.");
X exit(1);
X }
X if (!svc_register(udptransp, YPBINDPROG, YPBINDVERS, ypbindprog_2,
X IPPROTO_UDP)) {
X fprintf(stderr, "unable to register (YPBINDPROG, YPBINDVERS, udp).");
X exit(1);
X }
X
X tcptransp = svctcp_create(RPC_ANYSOCK, 0, 0);
X if (tcptransp == NULL) {
X fprintf(stderr, "cannot create tcp service.");
X exit(1);
X }
X if (!svc_register(tcptransp, YPBINDPROG, YPBINDVERS, ypbindprog_2,
X IPPROTO_TCP)) {
X fprintf(stderr, "unable to register (YPBINDPROG, YPBINDVERS, tcp).");
X exit(1);
X }
X
X if ((rpcsock = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, IPPROTO_UDP)) < 0) {
X perror("socket");
X return -1;
X }
X if ((pingsock = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, IPPROTO_UDP)) < 0) {
X perror("socket");
X return -1;
X }
X
X fcntl(rpcsock, F_SETFL, fcntl(rpcsock, F_GETFL, 0) | FNDELAY);
X fcntl(pingsock, F_SETFL, fcntl(rpcsock, F_GETFL, 0) | FNDELAY);
X one = 1;
X setsockopt(rpcsock, SOL_SOCKET, SO_BROADCAST, &one, sizeof(one));
X rmtca.prog = YPPROG;
X rmtca.vers = YPVERS;
X rmtca.proc = YPPROC_DOMAIN_NONACK;
X rmtca.xdr_args = NULL; /* set at call time */
X rmtca.args_ptr = NULL; /* set at call time */
X rmtcr.port_ptr = &rmtcr_port;
X rmtcr.xdr_results = xdr_bool;
X rmtcr.results_ptr = (caddr_t)&rmtcr_outval;
X
X /* build initial domain binding, make it "unsuccessful" */
X ypbindlist = (struct _dom_binding *)malloc(sizeof *ypbindlist);
X memset(ypbindlist, 0, sizeof *ypbindlist);
X strncpy(ypbindlist->dom_domain, domainname, sizeof ypbindlist->dom_domain);
X ypbindlist->dom_vers = YPVERS;
X ypbindlist->dom_alive = 0;
X ypbindlist->dom_lockfd = -1;
X sprintf(path, "%s/%s.%d", BINDINGDIR, ypbindlist->dom_domain,
X ypbindlist->dom_vers);
X (void)unlink(path);
X
X checkwork();
X
X while (1) {
X width = svc_maxfd;
X if (rpcsock > width)
X width = rpcsock;
X if (pingsock > width)
X width = pingsock;
X width++;
X
X fdsr = svc_fdset;
X FD_SET(rpcsock, &fdsr);
X FD_SET(pingsock, &fdsr);
X tv.tv_sec = 1;
X tv.tv_usec = 0;
X
X switch (select(width, &fdsr, NULL, NULL, &tv)) {
X case 0:
X checkwork();
X break;
X case -1:
X perror("select\n");
X break;
X default:
X if (FD_ISSET(rpcsock, &fdsr))
X handle_replies();
X if (FD_ISSET(pingsock, &fdsr))
X handle_ping();
X svc_getreqset(&fdsr);
X if (check)
X checkwork();
X break;
X }
X
X if (!evil && ypbindlist->dom_alive) {
X evil = 1;
X daemon(0, 0);
X }
X }
X}
X
X/*
X * State transition is done like this:
X *
X * STATE EVENT ACTION NEWSTATE TIMEOUT
X * no binding timeout broadcast no binding 5 sec
X * no binding answer -- binding 60 sec
X * binding timeout ping server checking 5 sec
X * checking timeout ping server + broadcast checking 5 sec
X * checking answer -- binding 60 sec
X */
Xcheckwork()
X{
X struct _dom_binding *ypdb;
X time_t t;
X
X check = 0;
X
X time(&t);
X for (ypdb = ypbindlist; ypdb; ypdb = ypdb->dom_pnext) {
X if (ypdb->dom_check_t < t) {
X if (ypdb->dom_alive == 1)
X ping(ypdb);
X else
X broadcast(ypdb);
X time(&t);
X ypdb->dom_check_t = t + 5;
X }
X }
X}
X
Xping(ypdb)
X struct _dom_binding *ypdb;
X{
X char *dom = ypdb->dom_domain;
X struct rpc_msg msg;
X char buf[1400];
X enum clnt_stat st;
X int outlen;
X AUTH *rpcua;
X XDR xdr;
X
X memset(&xdr, 0, sizeof xdr);
X memset(&msg, 0, sizeof msg);
X
X rpcua = authunix_create_default();
X if (rpcua == (AUTH *)NULL) {
X /*printf("cannot get unix auth\n");*/
X return RPC_SYSTEMERROR;
X }
X msg.rm_direction = CALL;
X msg.rm_call.cb_rpcvers = RPC_MSG_VERSION;
X msg.rm_call.cb_prog = YPPROG;
X msg.rm_call.cb_vers = YPVERS;
X msg.rm_call.cb_proc = YPPROC_DOMAIN_NONACK;
X msg.rm_call.cb_cred = rpcua->ah_cred;
X msg.rm_call.cb_verf = rpcua->ah_verf;
X
X msg.rm_xid = ypdb->dom_xid = (int)ypdb & 0xffffffff;
X xdrmem_create(&xdr, buf, sizeof buf, XDR_ENCODE);
X if (!xdr_callmsg(&xdr, &msg)) {
X st = RPC_CANTENCODEARGS;
X AUTH_DESTROY(rpcua);
X return st;
X }
X if (!xdr_domainname(&xdr, dom)) {
X st = RPC_CANTENCODEARGS;
X AUTH_DESTROY(rpcua);
X return st;
X }
X outlen = (int)xdr_getpos(&xdr);
X xdr_destroy(&xdr);
X if (outlen < 1) {
X st = RPC_CANTENCODEARGS;
X AUTH_DESTROY(rpcua);
X return st;
X }
X AUTH_DESTROY(rpcua);
X
X ypdb->dom_alive = 2;
X if (sendto(pingsock, buf, outlen, 0,
X (struct sockaddr *)&ypdb->dom_server_addr,
X sizeof ypdb->dom_server_addr) < 0)
X perror("sendto");
X return 0;
X
X}
X
Xstruct _dom_binding *
Xxid2ypdb(xid)
X int xid;
X{
X struct _dom_binding *ypdb;
X
X for (ypdb = ypbindlist; ypdb; ypdb = ypdb->dom_pnext)
X if (ypdb->dom_xid == xid)
X break;
X return (ypdb);
X}
X
Xbroadcast(ypdb)
X struct _dom_binding *ypdb;
X{
X char *dom = ypdb->dom_domain;
X struct rpc_msg msg;
X char buf[1400], inbuf[8192];
X char path[MAXPATHLEN];
X enum clnt_stat st;
X int outlen, i, sock, len;
X struct sockaddr_in bindsin;
X struct ifconf ifc;
X struct ifreq ifreq, *ifr;
X struct in_addr in;
X AUTH *rpcua;
X XDR xdr;
X
X rmtca.xdr_args = xdr_domainname;
X rmtca.args_ptr = dom;
X
X memset(&xdr, 0, sizeof xdr);
X memset(&msg, 0, sizeof msg);
X
X rpcua = authunix_create_default();
X if (rpcua == (AUTH *)NULL) {
X /*printf("cannot get unix auth\n");*/
X return RPC_SYSTEMERROR;
X }
X msg.rm_direction = CALL;
X msg.rm_call.cb_rpcvers = RPC_MSG_VERSION;
X msg.rm_call.cb_prog = PMAPPROG;
X msg.rm_call.cb_vers = PMAPVERS;
X msg.rm_call.cb_proc = PMAPPROC_CALLIT;
X msg.rm_call.cb_cred = rpcua->ah_cred;
X msg.rm_call.cb_verf = rpcua->ah_verf;
X
X msg.rm_xid = ypdb->dom_xid = (int)ypdb & 0xffffffff;
X xdrmem_create(&xdr, buf, sizeof buf, XDR_ENCODE);
X if (!xdr_callmsg(&xdr, &msg)) {
X st = RPC_CANTENCODEARGS;
X AUTH_DESTROY(rpcua);
X return st;
X }
X if (!xdr_rmtcall_args(&xdr, &rmtca)) {
X st = RPC_CANTENCODEARGS;
X AUTH_DESTROY(rpcua);
X return st;
X }
X outlen = (int)xdr_getpos(&xdr);
X xdr_destroy(&xdr);
X if (outlen < 1) {
X st = RPC_CANTENCODEARGS;
X AUTH_DESTROY(rpcua);
X return st;
X }
X AUTH_DESTROY(rpcua);
X
X if (ypdb->dom_lockfd != -1) {
X close(ypdb->dom_lockfd);
X ypdb->dom_lockfd = -1;
X sprintf(path, "%s/%s.%d", BINDINGDIR,
X ypdb->dom_domain, ypdb->dom_vers);
X unlink(path);
X }
X
X memset(&bindsin, 0, sizeof bindsin);
X bindsin.sin_family = AF_INET;
X bindsin.sin_len = sizeof(bindsin);
X bindsin.sin_port = htons(PMAPPORT);
X
X if (ypdb->dom_alive == 2) {
X /*
X * This resolves the following situation:
X * ypserver on other subnet was once bound,
X * but rebooted and is now using a different port
X */
X bindsin.sin_addr = ypdb->dom_server_addr.sin_addr;
X if (sendto(rpcsock, buf, outlen, 0, (struct sockaddr *)&bindsin,
X sizeof bindsin) < 0)
X perror("sendto");
X }
X /* find all networks and send the RPC packet out them all */
X if ((sock = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, IPPROTO_UDP)) < 0) {
X perror("socket");
X return -1;
X }
X
X ifc.ifc_len = sizeof inbuf;
X ifc.ifc_buf = inbuf;
X if (ioctl(sock, SIOCGIFCONF, &ifc) < 0) {
X close(sock);
X perror("ioctl(SIOCGIFCONF)");
X return -1;
X }
X ifr = ifc.ifc_req;
X ifreq.ifr_name[0] = '\0';
X for (i = 0; i < ifc.ifc_len; i += len, ifr = (struct ifreq *)((caddr_t)ifr + len)) {
X#if defined(BSD) && BSD >= 199103
X len = sizeof ifr->ifr_name + ifr->ifr_addr.sa_len;
X#else
X len = sizeof ifc.ifc_len / sizeof(struct ifreq);
X#endif
X ifreq = *ifr;
X if (ifreq.ifr_addr.sa_family != AF_INET)
X continue;
X if (ioctl(sock, SIOCGIFFLAGS, &ifreq) < 0) {
X perror("ioctl(SIOCGIFFLAGS)");
X continue;
X }
X if ((ifreq.ifr_flags & IFF_UP) == 0)
X continue;
X
X ifreq.ifr_flags &= (IFF_LOOPBACK | IFF_BROADCAST);
X if (ifreq.ifr_flags == IFF_BROADCAST) {
X if (ioctl(sock, SIOCGIFBRDADDR, &ifreq) < 0) {
X perror("ioctl(SIOCGIFBRDADDR)");
X continue;
X }
X } else if (ifreq.ifr_flags == IFF_LOOPBACK) {
X if (ioctl(sock, SIOCGIFADDR, &ifreq) < 0) {
X perror("ioctl(SIOCGIFADDR)");
X continue;
X }
X } else
X continue;
X
X in = ((struct sockaddr_in *)&ifreq.ifr_addr)->sin_addr;
X bindsin.sin_addr = in;
X if (sendto(rpcsock, buf, outlen, 0, (struct sockaddr *)&bindsin,
X sizeof bindsin) < 0)
X perror("sendto");
X }
X close(sock);
X return 0;
X}
X
X/*enum clnt_stat*/
Xhandle_replies()
X{
X char buf[1400];
X int fromlen, inlen;
X struct _dom_binding *ypdb;
X struct sockaddr_in raddr;
X struct rpc_msg msg;
X XDR xdr;
X
Xrecv_again:
X memset(&xdr, 0, sizeof(xdr));
X memset(&msg, 0, sizeof(msg));
X msg.acpted_rply.ar_verf = _null_auth;
X msg.acpted_rply.ar_results.where = (caddr_t)&rmtcr;
X msg.acpted_rply.ar_results.proc = xdr_rmtcallres;
X
Xtry_again:
X fromlen = sizeof (struct sockaddr);
X inlen = recvfrom(rpcsock, buf, sizeof buf, 0,
X (struct sockaddr *)&raddr, &fromlen);
X if (inlen < 0) {
X if (errno == EINTR)
X goto try_again;
X return RPC_CANTRECV;
X }
X if (inlen < sizeof(u_int32_t))
X goto recv_again;
X
X /*
X * see if reply transaction id matches sent id.
X * If so, decode the results.
X */
X xdrmem_create(&xdr, buf, (u_int)inlen, XDR_DECODE);
X if (xdr_replymsg(&xdr, &msg)) {
X if ((msg.rm_reply.rp_stat == MSG_ACCEPTED) &&
X (msg.acpted_rply.ar_stat == SUCCESS)) {
X raddr.sin_port = htons((u_short)rmtcr_port);
X ypdb = xid2ypdb(msg.rm_xid);
X if (ypdb)
X rpc_received(ypdb->dom_domain, &raddr, 0);
X }
X }
X xdr.x_op = XDR_FREE;
X msg.acpted_rply.ar_results.proc = xdr_void;
X xdr_destroy(&xdr);
X
X return RPC_SUCCESS;
X}
X
X/*enum clnt_stat*/
Xhandle_ping()
X{
X char buf[1400];
X int fromlen, inlen;
X struct _dom_binding *ypdb;
X struct sockaddr_in raddr;
X struct rpc_msg msg;
X XDR xdr;
X bool_t res;
X
Xrecv_again:
X memset(&xdr, 0, sizeof(xdr));
X memset(&msg, 0, sizeof(msg));
X msg.acpted_rply.ar_verf = _null_auth;
X msg.acpted_rply.ar_results.where = (caddr_t)&res;
X msg.acpted_rply.ar_results.proc = xdr_bool;
X
Xtry_again:
X fromlen = sizeof (struct sockaddr);
X inlen = recvfrom(pingsock, buf, sizeof buf, 0,
X (struct sockaddr *)&raddr, &fromlen);
X if (inlen < 0) {
X if (errno == EINTR)
X goto try_again;
X return RPC_CANTRECV;
X }
X if (inlen < sizeof(u_int32_t))
X goto recv_again;
X
X /*
X * see if reply transaction id matches sent id.
X * If so, decode the results.
X */
X xdrmem_create(&xdr, buf, (u_int)inlen, XDR_DECODE);
X if (xdr_replymsg(&xdr, &msg)) {
X if ((msg.rm_reply.rp_stat == MSG_ACCEPTED) &&
X (msg.acpted_rply.ar_stat == SUCCESS)) {
X ypdb = xid2ypdb(msg.rm_xid);
X if (ypdb)
X rpc_received(ypdb->dom_domain, &raddr, 0);
X }
X }
X xdr.x_op = XDR_FREE;
X msg.acpted_rply.ar_results.proc = xdr_void;
X xdr_destroy(&xdr);
X
X return RPC_SUCCESS;
X}
X
X/*
X * LOOPBACK IS MORE IMPORTANT: PUT IN HACK
X */
Xrpc_received(dom, raddrp, force)
Xchar *dom;
Xstruct sockaddr_in *raddrp;
Xint force;
X{
X struct _dom_binding *ypdb;
X struct iovec iov[2];
X struct ypbind_resp ybr;
X char path[MAXPATHLEN];
X int fd;
X
X /*printf("returned from %s about %s\n", inet_ntoa(raddrp->sin_addr), dom);*/
X
X if (dom == NULL)
X return;
X
X for (ypdb = ypbindlist; ypdb; ypdb = ypdb->dom_pnext)
X if (!strcmp(ypdb->dom_domain, dom))
X break;
X
X if (ypdb == NULL) {
X if (force == 0)
X return;
X ypdb = (struct _dom_binding *)malloc(sizeof *ypdb);
X memset(ypdb, 0, sizeof *ypdb);
X strncpy(ypdb->dom_domain, dom, sizeof ypdb->dom_domain);
X ypdb->dom_lockfd = -1;
X ypdb->dom_pnext = ypbindlist;
X ypbindlist = ypdb;
X }
X
X /* soft update, alive */
X if (ypdb->dom_alive == 1 && force == 0) {
X if (!memcmp(&ypdb->dom_server_addr, raddrp,
X sizeof ypdb->dom_server_addr)) {
X ypdb->dom_alive = 1;
X ypdb->dom_check_t = time(NULL) + 60; /* recheck binding in 60 sec */
X }
X return;
X }
X
X memcpy(&ypdb->dom_server_addr, raddrp, sizeof ypdb->dom_server_addr);
X ypdb->dom_check_t = time(NULL) + 60; /* recheck binding in 60 seconds */
X ypdb->dom_vers = YPVERS;
X ypdb->dom_alive = 1;
X
X if (ypdb->dom_lockfd != -1)
X close(ypdb->dom_lockfd);
X
X sprintf(path, "%s/%s.%d", BINDINGDIR,
X ypdb->dom_domain, ypdb->dom_vers);
X#ifdef O_SHLOCK
X if ((fd = open(path, O_CREAT|O_SHLOCK|O_RDWR|O_TRUNC, 0644)) == -1) {
X (void)mkdir(BINDINGDIR, 0755);
X if ((fd = open(path, O_CREAT|O_SHLOCK|O_RDWR|O_TRUNC, 0644)) == -1)
X return;
X }
X#else
X if ((fd = open(path, O_CREAT|O_RDWR|O_TRUNC, 0644)) == -1) {
X (void)mkdir(BINDINGDIR, 0755);
X if ((fd = open(path, O_CREAT|O_RDWR|O_TRUNC, 0644)) == -1)
X return;
X }
X flock(fd, LOCK_SH);
X#endif
X
X /*
X * ok, if BINDINGDIR exists, and we can create the binding file,
X * then write to it..
X */
X ypdb->dom_lockfd = fd;
X
X iov[0].iov_base = (caddr_t)&(udptransp->xp_port);
X iov[0].iov_len = sizeof udptransp->xp_port;
X iov[1].iov_base = (caddr_t)&ybr;
X iov[1].iov_len = sizeof ybr;
X
X memset(&ybr, 0, sizeof ybr);
X ybr.ypbind_status = YPBIND_SUCC_VAL;
X ybr.ypbind_respbody.ypbind_bindinfo.ypbind_binding_addr = raddrp->sin_addr;
X ybr.ypbind_respbody.ypbind_bindinfo.ypbind_binding_port = raddrp->sin_port;
X
X if (writev(ypdb->dom_lockfd, iov, 2) != iov[0].iov_len + iov[1].iov_len) {
X perror("write");
X close(ypdb->dom_lockfd);
X unlink(path);
X ypdb->dom_lockfd = -1;
X return;
X }
X}
END-of-15
echo x - 16
sed 's/^X//' >16 << 'END-of-16'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: ypbind hack
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 21 Apr 1995 02:48:52 EDT."
X <9504210649.AA17625@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 01:14:56 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xif that works, please don't commit that; i would like to do that
Xmyself in a few days, if things work out ok. i've not sent mail to
Xcore yet because i'm very busy with sun4m trap code.
END-of-16
echo x - 17
sed 's/^X//' >17 << 'END-of-17'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: ypbind hack
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 21 Apr 1995 02:48:52 EDT."
X <9504210649.AA17625@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 01:14:56 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xif that works, please don't commit that; i would like to do that
Xmyself in a few days, if things work out ok. i've not sent mail to
Xcore yet because i'm very busy with sun4m trap code.
END-of-17
echo x - 18
sed 's/^X//' >18 << 'END-of-18'
XReplied: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 10:40:02 -0600
XReplied: "chuck, johns "
XReturn-Path: pk@cs.few.eur.nl
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl (kaa.cs.few.eur.nl) by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA18271; Fri, 21 Apr 95 04:11:35 MDT
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA27996; Fri, 21 Apr 95 12:11:37 +0200
XDate: Fri, 21 Apr 95 12:11:37 +0200
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9504211011.AA27996@cs.few.eur.nl>
XTo: deraadt@theos.com
XSubject: Re: your 4/100 code
XCc: johns@cs.umr.edu, chuck@theos.com
X
X> They key is that I've been asking for "cvs log", and "cvs diff" access
X> for quite some time now. That is what I need. And once those are
X> given, I might as well be given "cvs commit" access.
X>
X> I am really surprised that you would offer so little after 3 months of
X> talking about and around this.
X>
X
XThe only thing _I_ can offer at this point is a private arrangement for the
Xsake of finding a practical way of integrating the changes you guys want to
Xsee in the -current NetBSD/sparc port.
X
XPlease consider directing your proposal for cvs access to `core@netbsd'; it
Xis the appropriate way (and it holds true for anyone). I'll be backing such
Xa proposal.
X
X-pk
X
X
XPS. I'm rather annoyed that these things are now being discussed in public
X on port-sparc.
END-of-18
echo x - 19
sed 's/^X//' >19 << 'END-of-19'
XTo: core@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: CVS access
XDate: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 07:15:19 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
XI would like to have CVS access once again. I would like to return to
Xthe development environment that I once had.
X
XI have about 6000 lines of diffs to arch/sparc. I would like to commit
Xthose changes myself. Because of the difficulty of maintaining changes
Xin multiple places in the tree, I have nearly ceased making any
Ximprovements to parts outside of arch/sparc. That will also start to
Xchange if I get access once again.
END-of-19
echo x - 20
sed 's/^X//' >20 << 'END-of-20'
XTo: core@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: CVS access
XDate: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 07:15:19 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
XI would like to have CVS access once again. I would like to return to
Xthe development environment that I once had.
X
XI have about 6000 lines of diffs to arch/sparc. I would like to commit
Xthose changes myself. Because of the difficulty of maintaining changes
Xin multiple places in the tree, I have nearly ceased making any
Ximprovements to parts outside of arch/sparc. That will also start to
Xchange if I get access once again.
END-of-20
echo x - 21
sed 's/^X//' >21 << 'END-of-21'
XReplied: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:09:54 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA27949; Sat, 22 Apr 95 13:47:40 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9504221947.AA27949@theos.com>
XReceived: from LOCALHOST by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa20087;
X 22 Apr 95 15:47 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: core@netbsd.org
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 21 Apr 1995 07:15:19 MDT."
X <9504211315.AA19068@theos.com>
XDate: Sat, 22 Apr 1995 15:47:21 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X> I would like to have CVS access once again. I would like to return to
X> the development environment that I once had.
X>
X> I have about 6000 lines of diffs to arch/sparc. I would like to commit
X> those changes myself. Because of the difficulty of maintaining changes
X> in multiple places in the tree, I have nearly ceased making any
X> improvements to parts outside of arch/sparc. That will also start to
X> change if I get access once again.
X
XI have no great objection to you having access to the CVS tree.
XWhether or not you should be able to freely hack the sparc port is
Xreally up to Paul, as it's his "ball" now.
X
XWhat i am concerned about:
X
X (1) if you're going to be working on a large portion of
X the source tree, e.g. the sparc port or large amounts
X of code outside of it, you need to be in "reasonable
X touch" with us. Do you think that will be difficult
X for you or us to do?
X
X (2) I want to be _sure_ that you in no way annoy, ruffle,
X tweak, perturb, piss off, piss on, bugger, etc.,
X any users, developers, or potential developers of
X NetBSD, unless they specifically ask you to. That's
X what got us to this point to begin with, really. Do
X you think you can manage _that_? I.e. are you willing
X to "just say no" to flaming people, however idiotic
X they may be?
X
X
X
Xlater,
X
Xchris
END-of-21
echo x - 22
sed 's/^X//' >22 << 'END-of-22'
XReturn-Path: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from pain.lcs.mit.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA01065; Sun, 23 Apr 95 01:39:18 MDT
XReceived: (from daemon@localhost) by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id CAA02277 for port-sparc-outgoing; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 02:27:11 -0400
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA02273 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 02:27:07 -0400
XMessage-Id: <199504230627.CAA02273@pain.lcs.mit.edu>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa20214;
X 23 Apr 95 2:26 EDT
XTo: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: need Sun si vme card
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
XDate: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 02:26:47 -0400
XSender: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XPrecedence: list
XX-Loop: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
X
XIf anyone has a spare/junk Sun vme si scsi card lying around, I would
Xlike to have one. I'm a ways along the task of writing an
Xinterrupt-driven dma'ing disconnect/reconnect 5380 driver for the
Xfollowing scsi's: obio si (sun3-only), vme si (any sun4/sun3), obio sw
X(4/100-only).
X
X(Later on this driver could probably be easily modified for other
Xports...)
END-of-22
echo x - 23
sed 's/^X//' >23 << 'END-of-23'
XTo: Adam Glass
XSubject: Re: hi and fyi
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 23 Apr 1995 21:42:36 PDT."
X <199504240442.VAA15167@toe.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 22:41:27 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
XI heard. I'm still not happy with the situation there. I'm still not
Xhappy with what you did.
X
XOtherwise, life is great.
END-of-23
echo x - 24
sed 's/^X//' >24 << 'END-of-24'
XReplied: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 22:41:28 -0600
XReplied: "Adam Glass "
XReturn-Path: glass@postgres.Berkeley.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from toe.CS.Berkeley.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA01046; Sun, 23 Apr 95 22:39:40 MDT
XReceived: (glass@localhost) by toe.CS.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.10/8.1B) id VAA15167; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 21:42:36 -0700
XDate: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 21:42:36 -0700
XFrom: Adam Glass
XMessage-Id: <199504240442.VAA15167@toe.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
XTo: theo@theos.com
XSubject: hi and fyi
X
X
X
Xfirst: I hope you are well.
X
Xsecond: FYI: I resigned from the NetBSD project last monday, effective
X last friday so that I could pursue other interests.
X
Xlater,
XAdam
END-of-24
echo x - 25
sed 's/^X//' >25 << 'END-of-25'
XForwarded: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:11:44 -0600
XForwarded: "johns, chuck "
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 22 Apr 1995 15:47:21 EDT."
X <9504221947.AA27949@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:09:54 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xthere hasn't been any progress. i've heard nothing further. that said,
Xi didn't reply to that mail earlier because i wasn't happy with the
Xtone of the last chunk in it. the mail didn't strike me as containing
Xan offer, rather, it struck me as requiring statements from me before
Xan offer would be made. that doesn't put us any closer. i'm sure that
Xit is better for all of us if we can get to the meat of the matter
Xwithout having to make promises, admissions, and such.
X
Xactually, there has been progress. diffs are now almost 9600 lines
Xwithout counting (i think) 12 new files. and this makes merging a
Xcouple hour long task.
X
Xyou must know, i want no part in any politics.
END-of-25
echo x - 26
sed 's/^X//' >26 << 'END-of-26'
XReplied: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:29:56 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReplied: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:28:09 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReplied: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:06:18 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA24130; Wed, 26 Apr 95 13:53:42 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9504261953.AA24130@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa03432;
X 26 Apr 95 15:53 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:09:54 MDT."
X <9504261909.AA23858@theos.com>
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 15:53:16 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X[ your message probably should have been sent to 'core', but... ]
X
X> there hasn't been any progress. i've heard nothing further. that said,
X> i didn't reply to that mail earlier because i wasn't happy with the
X> tone of the last chunk in it. the mail didn't strike me as containing
X> an offer, rather, it struck me as requiring statements from me before
X> an offer would be made. that doesn't put us any closer. i'm sure that
X> it is better for all of us if we can get to the meat of the matter
X> without having to make promises, admissions, and such.
X
XI'm sorry if you didn't like the tone of it, but frankly i wasn't
Xparticularly pleased with the tone of _your_ letter, myself. However,
Xthat's "water under the bridge."
X
X
XI _can't_ unilaterally make you an offer of an account with source
Xtree access, or of the right to modify the sparc port.
X
XThe former _has_ to be decided by 'core', though they seem to be
Xrelying on me to do most of the talking (as annoying as that is, to
Xme). The latter _has_ to be decided by Paul, as the SPARC port is
Xcurrently _his_ baby, and there has been little evidence presented to
Xindicate that it someone should be given "complete write access"
Xwithout his consent.
X
XThat being said:
X
XAs i said before, I have no objection to letting you have an account
Xwith CVS tree, _BUT_ in order for this to happen i need to know that
Xour relationship is going to be a positive one. Unfortunately, while
X'code generated' is important, it _isn't_ the entirety of the matter.
X
XTo my mind, a "positive working relationship" implies two things in
Xaddition to "code":
X (1) we (you, and 'core') can communicate well with each other,
X (2) that you aren't going to stomp on anybody's toes.
X
X
XI don't want any admissions, or anything like that. That's a waste of
Xtime for everybody involved.
X
XI _do_ however _need_ to know that you're going to do your best to
Xwork with us and to work with the other people involved (in various
Xcapacities) with the project.
X
XOnce i know that, _I_ can strongly advocate that you be given an
Xaccount. Since no one else seems to have much feeling about the
Xmatter at all, i think that would be enough.
X
X
X> you must know, i want no part in any politics.
X
XThat's good. Frankly, neither do we, nor have we ever. Politics is a
Xwaste of time, for the most part.
X
X
X
Xcgd
END-of-26
echo x - 27
sed 's/^X//' >27 << 'END-of-27'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 15:53:16 EDT."
X <9504261953.AA24130@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:06:18 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xso what shall i write to core to expedite the process?
END-of-27
echo x - 28
sed 's/^X//' >28 << 'END-of-28'
XTo: chuck@zeus.theos.com
XSubject: Chris G Demetriou: Re: CVS access
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:08:25 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xmy response to this was simply "what can i say to core to expedite the
Xprocess?"
X
X------- Forwarded Message
X
XReplied: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:06:18 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA24130; Wed, 26 Apr 95 13:53:42 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9504261953.AA24130@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa03432;
X 26 Apr 95 15:53 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:09:54 MDT."
X <9504261909.AA23858@theos.com>
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 15:53:16 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X[ your message probably should have been sent to 'core', but... ]
X
X> there hasn't been any progress. i've heard nothing further. that said,
X> i didn't reply to that mail earlier because i wasn't happy with the
X> tone of the last chunk in it. the mail didn't strike me as containing
X> an offer, rather, it struck me as requiring statements from me before
X> an offer would be made. that doesn't put us any closer. i'm sure that
X> it is better for all of us if we can get to the meat of the matter
X> without having to make promises, admissions, and such.
X
XI'm sorry if you didn't like the tone of it, but frankly i wasn't
Xparticularly pleased with the tone of _your_ letter, myself. However,
Xthat's "water under the bridge."
X
X
XI _can't_ unilaterally make you an offer of an account with source
Xtree access, or of the right to modify the sparc port.
X
XThe former _has_ to be decided by 'core', though they seem to be
Xrelying on me to do most of the talking (as annoying as that is, to
Xme). The latter _has_ to be decided by Paul, as the SPARC port is
Xcurrently _his_ baby, and there has been little evidence presented to
Xindicate that it someone should be given "complete write access"
Xwithout his consent.
X
XThat being said:
X
XAs i said before, I have no objection to letting you have an account
Xwith CVS tree, _BUT_ in order for this to happen i need to know that
Xour relationship is going to be a positive one. Unfortunately, while
X'code generated' is important, it _isn't_ the entirety of the matter.
X
XTo my mind, a "positive working relationship" implies two things in
Xaddition to "code":
X (1) we (you, and 'core') can communicate well with each other,
X (2) that you aren't going to stomp on anybody's toes.
X
X
XI don't want any admissions, or anything like that. That's a waste of
Xtime for everybody involved.
X
XI _do_ however _need_ to know that you're going to do your best to
Xwork with us and to work with the other people involved (in various
Xcapacities) with the project.
X
XOnce i know that, _I_ can strongly advocate that you be given an
Xaccount. Since no one else seems to have much feeling about the
Xmatter at all, i think that would be enough.
X
X
X> you must know, i want no part in any politics.
X
XThat's good. Frankly, neither do we, nor have we ever. Politics is a
Xwaste of time, for the most part.
X
X
X
Xcgd
X
X------- End of Forwarded Message
X
END-of-28
echo x - 29
sed 's/^X//' >29 << 'END-of-29'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 15:53:16 EDT."
X <9504261953.AA24130@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:28:09 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> I'm sorry if you didn't like the tone of it, but frankly i wasn't
X> particularly pleased with the tone of _your_ letter, myself. However,
X> that's "water under the bridge."
X
Xsorry to hear that, but i was speaking honestly -- it bothered me
Xenough to not reply to it for days; i was not trying to rub you wrong
Xwith it, nor was i trying to ignore what it said. it really sounded
Xlike it was treating me as a special case who has previously been a
Xreal asshole. those conditions have never been imposed on anyone else
Xwith such a statement. if you like, go read it again and try to see if
Xfrom my side. the concern is that i felt it was being very
Xantagonistic towards me; thus it took me days to finally respond to it
Xbecause i couldn't figure out what to say in reply. that it took me
Xthat many days to reply is an indication that i was placed in a
Xcondition where i could _not_ communicate with core, which is what you
Xwant. i'm trying to stay out of politics.
X
X> The latter _has_ to be decided by Paul, as the SPARC port is
X> currently _his_ baby, and there has been little evidence presented to
X> indicate that it someone should be given "complete write access"
X> without his consent.
X
Xi haven't heard anything from him on the matter.
X
X> To my mind, a "positive working relationship" implies two things in
X> addition to "code":
X> (1) we (you, and 'core') can communicate well with each other,
X
Xyou and i have communicated; thus far core has said nothing. that's
Xa failure of communication.
X
X> (2) that you aren't going to stomp on anybody's toes.
X
Xthat has never been my intention before.
X
X> I _do_ however _need_ to know that you're going to do your best to
X> work with us and to work with the other people involved (in various
X> capacities) with the project.
X
Xi have always done that, and always will. that's why there isn't
Xa NextBSD yet. the more the merrier, or at least that's how it used
Xto be.
X
X> Once i know that, _I_ can strongly advocate that you be given an
X> account. Since no one else seems to have much feeling about the
X> matter at all, i think that would be enough.
X
END-of-29
echo x - 30
sed 's/^X//' >30 << 'END-of-30'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 15:53:16 EDT."
X <9504261953.AA24130@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:29:56 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xif you don't go back and re-read it, that's actually better. let's
Xget on with the meat of the matter.
END-of-30
echo x - 31
sed 's/^X//' >31 << 'END-of-31'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 18:50:49 EDT."
X <9504262251.AA24979@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 18:11:13 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xyour last message to me was mangled.
END-of-31
echo x - 32
sed 's/^X//' >32 << 'END-of-32'
XReplied: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 19:00:46 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA25420; Wed, 26 Apr 95 18:18:23 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9504270018.AA25420@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa03922;
X 26 Apr 95 20:17 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:28:09 MDT."
X <9504262228.AA24828@theos.com>
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 20:17:46 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X[ replies to several pieces of mail, condensed into one... ]
X
X> it really sounded
X> like it was treating me as a special case who has previously been a
X> real asshole. those conditions have never been imposed on anyone else
X> with such a statement.
X
XI'm going to disregard the "who has previously been a real asshole"
Xclause, because it's pointless.
X
XYou _are_ a special case, however; never before in the history of the
Xproject had 'core' felt that they "had to" forcibly remove from any
Xcapacity. The fact is, we _did_ think that we had to do that, and i
Xthink we had reasonable cause to think so.
X
XBTW: i was sort-of modeling my comment in the original response
Xon the San Diego Zoo's "Do not tease ... ruffle ... etc. ... the
Xanimals" signs... The list wasn't intended to be taken literally, or
Xeven completely seriously. I was intended to be (at least slightly)
Xhumorous. sorry if it wasn't taken as such.
X
X
X> > The latter _has_ to be decided by Paul, as the SPARC port is
X> > currently _his_ baby, and there has been little evidence presented to
X> > indicate that it someone should be given "complete write access"
X> > without his consent.
X>
X> i haven't heard anything from him on the matter.
X
Xyes, and if he doesn't say anything within a "reasonable" period of
Xtime, it's going to be decided by fiat.
X
X
X> > (2) that you aren't going to stomp on anybody's toes.
X>
X> that has never been my intention before.
X
Xbut it _has_ happened; one can "forgive," but one can forget only if
Xone doesn't think a problem will bite in the future, and i'd like a
Xbit stronger feeling than "farm fuzzies" that it won't.
X
X(sorry, i've been burned several too many times going on "warm
Xfuzzies" alone. *sigh*)
X
X
X> > I _do_ however _need_ to know that you're going to do your best to
X> > work with us and to work with the other people involved (in various
X> > capacities) with the project.
X>
X> i have always done that, and always will. that's why there isn't
X> a NextBSD yet. the more the merrier, or at least that's how it used
X> to be.
X
XHmm. Well then, i feel that i must point out that at some times,
X"your best" _wasn't_ sufficiently restrained to be "good enough."
X
XThe point is, we (or at least I; since i've not heard anything to the
Xcontrary, i can only assume quiet agreement) want to be _sure_ that
Xyour future attempts _will be_ "good enough." Mostly, that means not
Xflaming anybody related to the NetBSD project, for any reason. If you
Xthink you've got cause to flame them, take it to somebody else
X(e.g. 'core' or me personally), and we'll deal with it.
X
X
Xyou also asked (earlier, i guess):
X> so what shall i write to core to expedite the process?
X
Xi can't really answer that, mostly because it's supposed to be some
Xcomment from you, i'd think. (i mean what, am i supposed to hand you
Xa script? or say, "the entire works of william shakespeare would
Xcertainly brighten up _my_ day, but i dunno about anyone else? 8-)
X
X
XThe point is, i'd like to hear a reasonable statement from your "lips"
Xthat:
X
X (1) you're willing to work _with_ us, be generally
X cooperative, etc. This is not unreasonable, and
X everything that you've said (namely, that you've been
X advocating all along that people should work together)
X has indicated that it's acceptable to you. I'd like to
X see a confirmation of that.
X
X (2) you're not going to flame people, and if you do feel
X strongly inclined to, that you'll punt the problem to
X somebody else. If somebody calls you a mud-sucking
X pig-dog, or is otherwise a twink, let somebody else deal
X with it...
X
X
X
Xlater,
X
Xchris
END-of-32
echo x - 33
sed 's/^X//' >33 << 'END-of-33'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 20:17:46 EDT."
X <9504270018.AA25420@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 19:00:46 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> > > (2) that you aren't going to stomp on anybody's toes.
X> >
X> > that has never been my intention before.
X>
X> but it _has_ happened; one can "forgive," but one can forget only if
X> one doesn't think a problem will bite in the future, and i'd like a
X> bit stronger feeling than "farm fuzzies" that it won't.
X
Xit has happened with all of us. it was never our intention, was it?
X
X> Hmm. Well then, i feel that i must point out that at some times,
X> "your best" _wasn't_ sufficiently restrained to be "good enough."
X
Xplease, you don't want me to start pointing fingers either, do you?
Xthere are fingers to point all the way around. there are people who
Xhave been driven away in all directions, by everyone involved.
X
X> The point is, we (or at least I; since i've not heard anything to the
X> contrary, i can only assume quiet agreement) want to be _sure_ that
X> your future attempts _will be_ "good enough." Mostly, that means not
X> flaming anybody related to the NetBSD project, for any reason. If you
X> think you've got cause to flame them, take it to somebody else
X> (e.g. 'core' or me personally), and we'll deal with it.
X
Xput it this way. i'm not willing to make my code available unless i
Xcommit it myself. would i get access, commit it myself, then purposely
Xgo out of my way to make a situation where once again i would not be
Xable to commit stuff?
X
Xas i've heard it, the entire situation of losing access was a
Xpreventative measure against sabotage, and unrelated otherwise from
Xcore. core doesn't matter to me anymore. it's politics. working on
Xcode matters.
X
X> The point is, i'd like to hear a reasonable statement from your "lips"
X> that:
X>
X> (1) you're willing to work _with_ us, be generally
X> cooperative, etc. This is not unreasonable, and
X> everything that you've said (namely, that you've been
X> advocating all along that people should work together)
X> has indicated that it's acceptable to you. I'd like to
X> see a confirmation of that.
X
Xi intend to be cooperative.
X
X> (2) you're not going to flame people, and if you do feel
X> strongly inclined to, that you'll punt the problem to
X> somebody else. If somebody calls you a mud-sucking
X> pig-dog, or is otherwise a twink, let somebody else deal
X> with it...
X
Xi will not flame people on mailing lists. i think that is sufficient.
Xthe expressing of my personal thoughts in my personal mail is a
Xpersonal thing, is it not?
END-of-33
echo x - 34
sed 's/^X//' >34 << 'END-of-34'
XReplied: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 02:32:19 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA27532; Thu, 27 Apr 95 02:20:16 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9504270820.AA27532@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa00758;
X 27 Apr 95 4:19 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 19:00:46 MDT."
X <9504270100.AA25701@theos.com>
XDate: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 04:19:51 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X> > The point is, we (or at least I; since i've not heard anything to the
X> > contrary, i can only assume quiet agreement) want to be _sure_ that
X> > your future attempts _will be_ "good enough." Mostly, that means not
X> > flaming anybody related to the NetBSD project, for any reason. If you
X> > think you've got cause to flame them, take it to somebody else
X> > (e.g. 'core' or me personally), and we'll deal with it.
X>
X> put it this way. i'm not willing to make my code available unless i
X> commit it myself. would i get access, commit it myself, then purposely
X> go out of my way to make a situation where once again i would not be
X> able to commit stuff?
X
XI think that that makes sense, more or less.
X
X
X> as i've heard it, the entire situation of losing access was a
X> preventative measure against sabotage, and unrelated otherwise from
X> core.
X
Xthat's true. However, having somebody who's a representative of
XNetBSD be "unsociable" doesn't reflect well on the project. Everybody
Xwho's got source tree access is, de facto, a representative of the
Xproject in at least some minor way.
X
XNo, that doesn't mean that we're perfect, but it _does_ mean that i
Xwant to make it clear up-front that antisocial behaviour is
Xunacceptable and won't be tolerated. Basically what i'd mostly like
Xis an acknowledgement of this.
X
XWhen i say "antisocial behaviour won't be tolerated" that means in
Xseveral ways: if you see somebody being "antisocial" then you should
Xpoint it out to them, and you should expect that it will be pointed
Xout to you, if you are.
X
X
X> core doesn't matter to me anymore. it's politics. working on
X> code matters.
X
X*chuckle* i wish _i_ didn't have to deal with it, frankly.
XI spend half of my time working on alpha code, the rest dealing with
Xbullshit.
X
XOf course, _somebody's_ gotta motivate things like getting a web page
Xset up and done... And i think it's quite obvious that very _few_
Xpeople are willing to do anything positive regarding "politics."
X
X
X> > (2) you're not going to flame people, and if you do feel
X> > strongly inclined to, that you'll punt the problem to
X> > somebody else. If somebody calls you a mud-sucking
X> > pig-dog, or is otherwise a twink, let somebody else deal
X> > with it...
X>
X> i will not flame people on mailing lists. i think that is sufficient.
X> the expressing of my personal thoughts in my personal mail is a
X> personal thing, is it not?
X
XThat's sufficient, as long as i don't get people whining into my
Xpersonal mailbox, or into 'core@netbsd.org' about it.
X
XYou'll also note that i'm quite willing to tolerate -- and blow off --
Xsuch whining, if i think it's unjustified. The easiest way to make
X_sure_ that whining is unjustified is to be civil, even when flaming
Xsomebody. I think the point is, there are many more subtle and more
Xeffective, and less damaging ways of telling somebody that they're a
Xfucking idiot than saying "you're a fucking idiot."
X
X"whatever."
X
X
XAnyway, i think we should get this show back on the road. that being
Xsaid, i think you should send some mail to core, saying:
X
X (1) that you think you can work reasonably with us. you've
X already expressed that to me. Given that, it can't hurt
X to express it to core. You might also express your
X surprise or dismay that exactly one of 'core' stated any
X opinion (did anybody else say anything to you privately?),
X and you might also explicitly ask paul to "check off" on
X you being given "complete write access" to the sparc port.
X
X (2) That you're going to try -- presumably "try hard", though
X that needn't be specified -- to be "annoyingly reasonable"
X with people who piss you off, so that they don't get
X annoyed at us and say "neener, neener, you shouldn't have
X let him come back, you twinks."
X
XYou may think that the latter is completely "political," for some
Xdefintion of "political." It probably is, but, frankly, we have to
Xpay _some_ attention to politics if we want to be writing code that's
Xused by more than a handful of people.
X
XWhen i think of "politics," i think of Jordan Hubbard, flat out lying
Xabout what's in, or going to be in, FreeBSD, or what the system can
Xdo, or what's wrong with the system. (worth noting: I've come to
Xunderstand Kolstad, even see him as a reasonable person. I see jordan
Xas a _liar_, period.) _that's_ not the game that we, or i, play.
X
Xbut we _do_ need some reasonable amount of "positive public image" if
Xwe're going to keep attracting developers and users. Do you know how
Xmany people out there in "net-land" think that NetBSD is FreeBSD,
Xported to a bunch of other architectures?
X
XI think that my point (it's hard to stand on a soapbox and rant, if
Xyou don't have a point... 8-), is that _I'M_ the person who tends to
Xdo a fair amount of the lobbying, herding, coercing, to try to make us
X(the NetBSD project) more 'presentable' and 'appetizing' to the public.
Xwhile i'm quite sure that you don't want to be on the front line
Xfighting that battle, every little thing you can do to help NetBSD's
Ximage is a win.
X
X
Xanyway, time to go home... hopefully we'll get this all resolved by
Xtomorrow night...
X
X
Xlater,
X
Xchris
END-of-34
echo x - 35
sed 's/^X//' >35 << 'END-of-35'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 27 Apr 1995 04:19:51 EDT."
X <9504270820.AA27532@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 02:32:18 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> Apr 27 02:20:23 zeus portmap[27537]: connect from 128.2.198.241 to \
X> dump(): request from unauthorized host
X
Xsorry, i have real security on my machine.
END-of-35
echo x - 36
sed 's/^X//' >36 << 'END-of-36'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 27 Apr 1995 04:36:22 EDT."
X <9504270836.AA27615@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 02:39:02 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xit is pretty amazing what one can do for security without a filtering
Xrouter.
END-of-36
echo x - 37
sed 's/^X//' >37 << 'END-of-37'
XTo: chuck@zeus.theos.com
XSubject: Chris G Demetriou: Re: CVS access
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 12:09:35 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X
X------- Forwarded Message
X
XReplied: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 02:32:19 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA27532; Thu, 27 Apr 95 02:20:16 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9504270820.AA27532@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa00758;
X 27 Apr 95 4:19 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: CVS access
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 1995 19:00:46 MDT."
X <9504270100.AA25701@theos.com>
XDate: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 04:19:51 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X> > The point is, we (or at least I; since i've not heard anything to the
X> > contrary, i can only assume quiet agreement) want to be _sure_ that
X> > your future attempts _will be_ "good enough." Mostly, that means not
X> > flaming anybody related to the NetBSD project, for any reason. If you
X> > think you've got cause to flame them, take it to somebody else
X> > (e.g. 'core' or me personally), and we'll deal with it.
X>
X> put it this way. i'm not willing to make my code available unless i
X> commit it myself. would i get access, commit it myself, then purposely
X> go out of my way to make a situation where once again i would not be
X> able to commit stuff?
X
XI think that that makes sense, more or less.
X
X
X> as i've heard it, the entire situation of losing access was a
X> preventative measure against sabotage, and unrelated otherwise from
X> core.
X
Xthat's true. However, having somebody who's a representative of
XNetBSD be "unsociable" doesn't reflect well on the project. Everybody
Xwho's got source tree access is, de facto, a representative of the
Xproject in at least some minor way.
X
XNo, that doesn't mean that we're perfect, but it _does_ mean that i
Xwant to make it clear up-front that antisocial behaviour is
Xunacceptable and won't be tolerated. Basically what i'd mostly like
Xis an acknowledgement of this.
X
XWhen i say "antisocial behaviour won't be tolerated" that means in
Xseveral ways: if you see somebody being "antisocial" then you should
Xpoint it out to them, and you should expect that it will be pointed
Xout to you, if you are.
X
X
X> core doesn't matter to me anymore. it's politics. working on
X> code matters.
X
X*chuckle* i wish _i_ didn't have to deal with it, frankly.
XI spend half of my time working on alpha code, the rest dealing with
Xbullshit.
X
XOf course, _somebody's_ gotta motivate things like getting a web page
Xset up and done... And i think it's quite obvious that very _few_
Xpeople are willing to do anything positive regarding "politics."
X
X
X> > (2) you're not going to flame people, and if you do feel
X> > strongly inclined to, that you'll punt the problem to
X> > somebody else. If somebody calls you a mud-sucking
X> > pig-dog, or is otherwise a twink, let somebody else deal
X> > with it...
X>
X> i will not flame people on mailing lists. i think that is sufficient.
X> the expressing of my personal thoughts in my personal mail is a
X> personal thing, is it not?
X
XThat's sufficient, as long as i don't get people whining into my
Xpersonal mailbox, or into 'core@netbsd.org' about it.
X
XYou'll also note that i'm quite willing to tolerate -- and blow off --
Xsuch whining, if i think it's unjustified. The easiest way to make
X_sure_ that whining is unjustified is to be civil, even when flaming
Xsomebody. I think the point is, there are many more subtle and more
Xeffective, and less damaging ways of telling somebody that they're a
Xfucking idiot than saying "you're a fucking idiot."
X
X"whatever."
X
X
XAnyway, i think we should get this show back on the road. that being
Xsaid, i think you should send some mail to core, saying:
X
X (1) that you think you can work reasonably with us. you've
X already expressed that to me. Given that, it can't hurt
X to express it to core. You might also express your
X surprise or dismay that exactly one of 'core' stated any
X opinion (did anybody else say anything to you privately?),
X and you might also explicitly ask paul to "check off" on
X you being given "complete write access" to the sparc port.
X
X (2) That you're going to try -- presumably "try hard", though
X that needn't be specified -- to be "annoyingly reasonable"
X with people who piss you off, so that they don't get
X annoyed at us and say "neener, neener, you shouldn't have
X let him come back, you twinks."
X
XYou may think that the latter is completely "political," for some
Xdefintion of "political." It probably is, but, frankly, we have to
Xpay _some_ attention to politics if we want to be writing code that's
Xused by more than a handful of people.
X
XWhen i think of "politics," i think of Jordan Hubbard, flat out lying
Xabout what's in, or going to be in, FreeBSD, or what the system can
Xdo, or what's wrong with the system. (worth noting: I've come to
Xunderstand Kolstad, even see him as a reasonable person. I see jordan
Xas a _liar_, period.) _that's_ not the game that we, or i, play.
X
Xbut we _do_ need some reasonable amount of "positive public image" if
Xwe're going to keep attracting developers and users. Do you know how
Xmany people out there in "net-land" think that NetBSD is FreeBSD,
Xported to a bunch of other architectures?
X
XI think that my point (it's hard to stand on a soapbox and rant, if
Xyou don't have a point... 8-), is that _I'M_ the person who tends to
Xdo a fair amount of the lobbying, herding, coercing, to try to make us
X(the NetBSD project) more 'presentable' and 'appetizing' to the public.
Xwhile i'm quite sure that you don't want to be on the front line
Xfighting that battle, every little thing you can do to help NetBSD's
Ximage is a win.
X
X
Xanyway, time to go home... hopefully we'll get this all resolved by
Xtomorrow night...
X
X
Xlater,
X
Xchris
X
X------- End of Forwarded Message
X
END-of-37
echo x - 38
sed 's/^X//' >38 << 'END-of-38'
XReplied: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 14:40:18 -0600
XReplied: "Paul Kranenburg "
XReturn-Path: pk@cs.few.eur.nl
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl (kaa.cs.few.eur.nl) by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA01591; Thu, 27 Apr 95 14:37:37 MDT
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA02646; Thu, 27 Apr 95 22:16:47 +0200
XDate: Thu, 27 Apr 95 22:16:47 +0200
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9504272016.AA02646@cs.few.eur.nl>
XTo: deraadt@theos.com
X
XHi Theo,
X
XI've made it clear to `core' that I do not have any objection to you
Xhaving CVS access. I understand you've been chatting with Chris a bit
Xon the subject. Let me make it clear to you that there's no doubt in my
Xmind that you do not actually disagree with Chris' two points of
X"clarification". That much I have come to understand from our previous
Xconversations. I guess Chris might feel about the same. I don't know about
Xthe others.
X
X-pk
END-of-38
echo x - 39
sed 's/^X//' >39 << 'END-of-39'
XTo: Paul Kranenburg
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 27 Apr 1995 22:16:47 +0200."
X <9504272016.AA02646@cs.few.eur.nl>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 14:40:19 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
XThanks.
X
XI think we are getting closer.
X
XI crossed the line of 10,000 lines of diffs a few hours ago. You
Xcreated a large bug in obio.c as well -- the bootpath does not work
Xthe way you think it does. It was also trivial to optimize in_cksum.c
Xfurther. These diffs do not include the additional 10 or 12 new files.
END-of-39
echo x - 40
sed 's/^X//' >40 << 'END-of-40'
XTo: pk@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: irqs
XDate: Thu, 04 May 1995 21:12:07 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xi have completely different code for tallying interrupts, so that vmstat -i
Xworks completely correctly.
END-of-40
echo x - 41
sed 's/^X//' >41 << 'END-of-41'
XTo: Paul Kranenburg
XSubject: Re: irqs
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 May 1995 16:58:19 +0200."
X <9505051458.AA10431@cs.few.eur.nl>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Fri, 05 May 1995 21:39:10 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> > i have completely different code for tallying interrupts, so that vmstat -i
X> > works completely correctly.
X>
X> Oh, tell me..
X>
X> The thing I noticed is that vmstat -i still also displays `intrnames' et.al.
X
Xi think that is ok. it should show both, so that you can see a total
Xof each intr#, as well as what each device is using. i think that is
Xcool. anyways, my code does the correct adding for all devices as
Xevents, but still does level counting correctly too.
END-of-41
echo x - 42
sed 's/^X//' >42 << 'END-of-42'
XTo: Paul Kranenburg
XSubject: Re: irqs
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 06 May 1995 11:24:51 +0200."
X <9505060924.AA04457@cs.few.eur.nl>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Sat, 06 May 1995 22:04:15 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> > anyways, my code does the correct adding for all devices as
X> > events, but still does level counting correctly too.
X>
X> Do you count `events' at different places (ie. in locore in stead of
X> individual interrupt handlers)? Trying to figure out how it can be
X> "completely different" ... :-)
X
XIt lets assembly language know where the counter is that should be
Xincremented, a counter inside a registered event. Perhaps you wrote
Xsomething similar more recevently.
X
END-of-42
echo x - 43
sed 's/^X//' >43 << 'END-of-43'
XTo: pk@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: fd.c
XDate: Tue, 09 May 1995 23:01:00 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xthere are sun4c machines with 82077 floppy chips. Got one right here.
XThere apparently is a sun4m machine of some kind with an 82072 as
Xwell, I am _told_.. that might not be true.
X
XWhat's the deal with the cvs account? I'll be back in Calgary in about
X12 days. The moment the account is ready, I can start merging. I've got 2
Xother netbsd ports I'm responsible for now.
END-of-43
echo x - 44
sed 's/^X//' >44 << 'END-of-44'
XTo: Paul Kranenburg
XSubject: Re: fd.c
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 10 May 1995 09:15:42 +0200."
X <9505100715.AA10622@cs.few.eur.nl>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 10 May 1995 02:57:41 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
XI sent two pieces of mail to core. Both of them were not replied
Xto.
XI am supposed to communicate with core, but apparently core (besides you
Xand chris) do not wish to communicate with me.
X
XI have no idea what else I need to say to core.
X
XBy the way, agreeing to something with is assumed with any other people,
Xisn't the same as having it assumed.
END-of-44
echo x - 45
sed 's/^X//' >45 << 'END-of-45'
XTo: core@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: back
XDate: Wed, 17 May 1995 09:36:20 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xi'm back from Singapore. it's clammy, exceedingly hot, and rather
Xgross there.
X
Xdo we have a current holdup or not? anything i need to still say so
Xthat we can get onto the job of letting people get these sources?
X
Xalso, i think Chuck would benefit from source access as well. he has
Xmanaged in under two weeks get a multiuser diskless port running on
Xthe mvme147 68030 card. i am going to be adding support for the
Xmvme162/7 68040 and mvme172/7 68060 cards to the port as well.
Xbecause the code was based on the da30 port -- and the da30 port had
Xfallen way behind -- access to logs and diffs in the amiga and hp300
Xports would be very useful for Chuck.
X
Xhe has also done some serious revamping of the libnetboot code for a 2
Xstage boot for the machine, and he might be interested in merging that
Xhimself.
END-of-45
echo x - 46
sed 's/^X//' >46 << 'END-of-46'
XTo: "Charles M. Hannum"
Xcc: deraadt@theos.com, port-sparc@netbsd.org
XSubject: Re: new test kernel
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 19 May 1995 13:51:08 EDT."
X <199505191751.NAA24116@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Fri, 19 May 1995 11:57:38 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> (i had to make a small but disgusting change to the MI scsi code,
X> because there isn't a way to find out which target/unit a particular
X> device is on, well, at least not when dk_establish() is called. i'm
X> searching for a better change to the scsi code, but nothing looks
X> better at the moment.)
X>
X> One of the other ports (Amiga, I think), after some discussion with
X> me, added a routine to the SCSI code that will look up the device's
X> unit number based on a bus:target:lun triplet. This is very easy to
X> do.
X
Xdoes this routine exist now, or when will it be in the trunk?
XI couldn't find anything in the trunk.
X
Xdoes it work before dk_establish() has been called by the scsi
Xsubsystem? it needs to work that early, since the sparc port does
Xbootpath calculations at that time (doing them later on would be an
Xextremely difficult change.)
X
Xdoes it tell me whether the device is an sd, st, cd, or otherwise?
XI'm not sure if I need this information, but it might be nice.
END-of-46
echo x - 47
sed 's/^X//' >47 << 'END-of-47'
XReplied: Sun, 21 May 1995 21:09:04 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou Theo de Raadt , core@netbsd.org"
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA28338; Sun, 21 May 95 01:32:21 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9505210732.AA28338@theos.com>
XReceived: from LOCALHOST by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa01415;
X 21 May 95 3:31 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: core@netbsd.org
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 17 May 1995 09:36:20 MDT."
X <9505171536.AA02495@theos.com>
XDate: Sun, 21 May 1995 03:31:35 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
Xsorry it took me so long to respond to this... of course, i've not
Xseen anybody else respond, either... *sigh*
X
X
X> i'm back from Singapore. it's clammy, exceedingly hot, and rather
X> gross there.
X
Xyah; i heard you got sick. "ick."
X
X
X> do we have a current holdup or not? anything i need to still say so
X> that we can get onto the job of letting people get these sources?
X
XIn the only "public" exchange of mail (i.e. sent to both you and all
Xof 'core'): (1) you requested source tree access (that was your
Xinitial piece of mail), and (2) i responded with a couple of
Xquestions/statements, neither of which were commented on by anybody.
X
XI'd like to know, "for the record" (i.e. not in private mail to me; in
Xmail to 'core') what your responses to them are.
X
X
X> also, i think Chuck would benefit from source access as well.
X
XI actually asked him, a bit ago (when i found out that he had the mvme
Xcode working) if he wanted to be the mvme port's maintainer. he was
X... very non-commital. So i didn't push it.
X
X
X
Xcgd
END-of-47
echo x - 48
sed 's/^X//' >48 << 'END-of-48'
XReplied: Sun, 21 May 1995 21:27:14 -0600
XReplied: "Paul Kranenburg "
XReturn-Path: pk@cs.few.eur.nl
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl (kaa.cs.few.eur.nl) by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA00484; Sun, 21 May 95 09:00:16 MDT
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA12471; Sun, 21 May 95 13:33:35 +0200
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9505211133.AA12471@cs.few.eur.nl>
XSubject: Re: back
XTo: deraadt@theos.com (Theo de Raadt)
XDate: Sun, 21 May 1995 13:33:35 +0200 (MET DST)
XCc: core@netbsd.org
XIn-Reply-To: <9505171536.AA02495@theos.com> from "Theo de Raadt" at May 17, 95 09:36:20 am
XX-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13]
XMime-Version: 1.0
XContent-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
XContent-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
XContent-Length: 643
X
X> do we have a current holdup or not?
X
XAs I've mentioned before (and Chris too, just now) the previous series
Xof exchanges of opinions on `core' hasn't been completed. Let's finish
X"the protocol". Let me attempt to help iron out the remaining ripples
Xwrt. `those with source access' by re-stating the obvious: it's a bunch
Xof people with interesting contributions to make to NetBSD, who know what
Xthey are doing (most of the time:-) when diddling the sources, and are
Xcomitted to take responsibility to ensure that a fine, homogeneous system
Xis the result of their labour (even when faced with different opinions
Xon particular details).
X
X
X-pk
END-of-48
echo x - 49
sed 's/^X//' >49 << 'END-of-49'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: SQEC sbus quad ethernet controller?
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 21 May 1995 20:37:46 EDT."
X <9505220038.AA02829@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Sun, 21 May 1995 19:01:55 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xthe problem with dec hardware is that, even when they manage to do
Xsomething right (and they do that often) noone else picks up on it.
X
Xthus we continue in the endless loop of hardware of buying/building
Xwith hardware that is optimal in some new way, but suboptimal in all
Xthe old ways that used to count, then the next rev comes out, and it's
Xfaster, cheaper, smaller and once again it's a programmers nightmare.
X
Xlike the vax dh serial board, which did magic for you with dma
Xengines. and now finally, 15 years later, the cirrus logic chips come
Xout (of course, they now have one that does ppp for you, too).
X
Xjust look at the growth in scsi controller device drivers as we come
Xto `more sophisticated' scsi controllers.
X
Xand then my second (and the best example, if you've ever looked at it)
Xis what it takes to do an fddi driver from scratch if you build a
Xboard with the chips. it's impossible because a smit implimentation
Xrequires on the order of 10 man years to write.
X
Xalso, that's why i like dec's fddi cards. they're smart cards.
X
Xreally, not even those chips that we normally call "nice" -- for
Xexample the lance -- are actually all that nice. they're kinda gross.
X
Xoh well, rant over. and two days from now i'll be writing an i82596
Xethernet driver -- a 32 bit ethernet chip that does in-memory
Xdescriptors, but at least it does "bus snooping" to see the
Xdescriptors change..
END-of-49
echo x - 50
sed 's/^X//' >50 << 'END-of-50'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: SQEC sbus quad ethernet controller?
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 21 May 1995 21:09:35 EDT."
X <9505220110.AA02950@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Sun, 21 May 1995 20:15:11 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xis there a way you could get docs to me? it sounds really neat, i'd
Xlike to read about it.
END-of-50
echo x - 51
sed 's/^X//' >51 << 'END-of-51'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
Xcc: Theo de Raadt , core@netbsd.org
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 21 May 1995 03:31:35 EDT."
X <9505210732.AA28338@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Sun, 21 May 1995 21:09:04 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> sorry it took me so long to respond to this... of course, i've not
X> seen anybody else respond, either... *sigh*
X
Xthis has bothered me a fair bit. the mail suggests that i'm supposed
Xto communicate with the core group, yet when i try to, i get nothing
Xin return. i don't think that is right.
X
X> In the only "public" exchange of mail (i.e. sent to both you and all
X> of 'core'): (1) you requested source tree access (that was your
X> initial piece of mail), and (2) i responded with a couple of
X> questions/statements, neither of which were commented on by anybody.
X>
X> I'd like to know, "for the record" (i.e. not in private mail to me; in
X> mail to 'core') what your responses to them are.
X
Xyou asked if i would communicate with core -- as has been seen i have
Xbeen trying. i'm somewhat dissapointed at the little that i have
Xgotten.
X
Xyou also asked how i would react to users; i responded with something
Xlike: that if it was a private piece of mail i expected it to be kept
Xprivate and could say what i wanted to, otherwise you can expect high
Xstandards. i think that is fair.
X
X> > also, i think Chuck would benefit from source access as well.
X>
X> I actually asked him, a bit ago (when i found out that he had the mvme
X> code working) if he wanted to be the mvme port's maintainer. he was
X> ... very non-commital. So i didn't push it.
X
Xit's a funny situation. chuck is a non-commital person. he and i
Xtalked a little about cvs access (after i sent that mail) -- i think
Xhe will remain non-commital, and i think it is because he doesn't want
Xto gain any of the responsibilities before seeing the benefits. but he
Xstill does excellent initial work (all the code you've seen from him
Xhas been polished by me, some more than others, but none the less his
Xinitial work IS excellent). i think he would benefit from having
Xsource access, even if his major use turns out to be "looking" at
Xdiffs as he writes other chunks of code.
X
Xhe wasted some serious chunks of time because he didn't have cvs
Xaccess (various differences between the outdated da30 port, the hp300
Xport, current, lance drivers from here and there, etc). even if there
Xisn't a defined role to cause chuck to receive CVS access, i think he
Xwould benefit greatly, and i don't think it'll be long before he finds
Xa niche.
X
Xfor those who aren't filled in on the details, i'm going to be
Xextending the mvme68k port to other cards that chuck does not have,
Xand i am getting paid to do so.
X
X(he did the right thing to start with the da30 port, by the way. he's
Xported the da30 port to another box before, so he was most familiar
Xwith it. it is config.new, and compared to other m68k ports it is
Xtiny).
END-of-51
echo x - 52
sed 's/^X//' >52 << 'END-of-52'
XReturn-Path: deraadt@theos.com
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LOCALHOST.theos.com by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA03534; Sun, 21 May 95 21:09:05 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9505220309.AA03534@theos.com>
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XCc: Theo de Raadt , core@netbsd.org
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 21 May 1995 03:31:35 EDT."
X <9505210732.AA28338@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Sun, 21 May 1995 21:09:04 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> sorry it took me so long to respond to this... of course, i've not
X> seen anybody else respond, either... *sigh*
X
Xthis has bothered me a fair bit. the mail suggests that i'm supposed
Xto communicate with the core group, yet when i try to, i get nothing
Xin return. i don't think that is right.
X
X> In the only "public" exchange of mail (i.e. sent to both you and all
X> of 'core'): (1) you requested source tree access (that was your
X> initial piece of mail), and (2) i responded with a couple of
X> questions/statements, neither of which were commented on by anybody.
X>
X> I'd like to know, "for the record" (i.e. not in private mail to me; in
X> mail to 'core') what your responses to them are.
X
Xyou asked if i would communicate with core -- as has been seen i have
Xbeen trying. i'm somewhat dissapointed at the little that i have
Xgotten.
X
Xyou also asked how i would react to users; i responded with something
Xlike: that if it was a private piece of mail i expected it to be kept
Xprivate and could say what i wanted to, otherwise you can expect high
Xstandards. i think that is fair.
X
X> > also, i think Chuck would benefit from source access as well.
X>
X> I actually asked him, a bit ago (when i found out that he had the mvme
X> code working) if he wanted to be the mvme port's maintainer. he was
X> ... very non-commital. So i didn't push it.
X
Xit's a funny situation. chuck is a non-commital person. he and i
Xtalked a little about cvs access (after i sent that mail) -- i think
Xhe will remain non-commital, and i think it is because he doesn't want
Xto gain any of the responsibilities before seeing the benefits. but he
Xstill does excellent initial work (all the code you've seen from him
Xhas been polished by me, some more than others, but none the less his
Xinitial work IS excellent). i think he would benefit from having
Xsource access, even if his major use turns out to be "looking" at
Xdiffs as he writes other chunks of code.
X
Xhe wasted some serious chunks of time because he didn't have cvs
Xaccess (various differences between the outdated da30 port, the hp300
Xport, current, lance drivers from here and there, etc). even if there
Xisn't a defined role to cause chuck to receive CVS access, i think he
Xwould benefit greatly, and i don't think it'll be long before he finds
Xa niche.
X
Xfor those who aren't filled in on the details, i'm going to be
Xextending the mvme68k port to other cards that chuck does not have,
Xand i am getting paid to do so.
X
X(he did the right thing to start with the da30 port, by the way. he's
Xported the da30 port to another box before, so he was most familiar
Xwith it. it is config.new, and compared to other m68k ports it is
Xtiny).
END-of-52
echo x - 53
sed 's/^X//' >53 << 'END-of-53'
XReplied: Sun, 21 May 1995 21:50:46 -0600
XReplied: ""Charles M. Hannum" deraadt@theos.com, Chris_G_Demetriou@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu,
XReplied: core@NetBSD.ORG"
XReturn-Path: mycroft@gnu.ai.mit.edu
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA03728; Sun, 21 May 95 21:37:02 MDT
XReceived: by duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12GNU) id XAA18781; Sun, 21 May 1995 23:36:58 -0400
XDate: Sun, 21 May 1995 23:36:58 -0400
XMessage-Id: <199505220336.XAA18781@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
XFrom: "Charles M. Hannum"
XTo: deraadt@theos.com
XCc: Chris_G_Demetriou@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu, core@NetBSD.ORG
XIn-Reply-To: <9505220309.AA03534@theos.com> (message from Theo de Raadt on Sun, 21 May 1995 21:09:04 -0600)
XSubject: Re: back
X
X
X this has bothered me a fair bit. the mail suggests that i'm supposed
X to communicate with the core group, yet when i try to, i get nothing
X in return.
X
XThat's *not* true. What you got was a set of questions from Chris,
Xthat I, among others, have been waiting to see answered. Your
Xreluctance to answer them is not a step in the right direction.
X
X you asked if i would communicate with core -- as has been seen i have
X been trying. i'm somewhat dissapointed at the little that i have
X gotten.
X
XWhat, precisely, did you expect? Chris dealt with all of my concerns
Xat that point. There is no need for each of us to reply to your mail;
Xif we have differing opinions, then we will discuss them amongst
Xourselves.
X
X you also asked how i would react to users; i responded with something
X like: that if it was a private piece of mail i expected it to be kept
X private and could say what i wanted to, [...]
X
XProvided that it's clear that you in no way speak for the NetBSD
Xproject, and disregarding libel for the moment, it is none of our
Xconcern what you say to people privately. However, I will remind you
Xthat your haste to say `what [you] wanted to', often including
Xvitriolic flames, is part of what got us to this point to being with.
X
END-of-53
echo x - 54
sed 's/^X//' >54 << 'END-of-54'
XTo: "Charles M. Hannum"
Xcc: deraadt@theos.com, Chris_G_Demetriou@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu,
X core@netbsd.org
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 21 May 1995 23:36:58 EDT."
X <199505220336.XAA18781@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Sun, 21 May 1995 21:50:46 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> this has bothered me a fair bit. the mail suggests that i'm supposed
X> to communicate with the core group, yet when i try to, i get nothing
X> in return.
X>
X> That's *not* true. What you got was a set of questions from Chris,
X> that I, among others, have been waiting to see answered. Your
X> reluctance to answer them is not a step in the right direction.
X
Xfirst, you suggest that you speak for the others as well. this is the
Xfirst time that i have heard anything of the kind -- i was led to
Xbelieve that what Chris posted was what Chris thought, and that he
Xfelt others would speak up. i know you guys have archives -- go read
Xthe mail (i just double checked).
X
Xi do not feel that sending mail to core and receiving mail back from
Xone person -- who expresses to me that he wishes others had something
Xpublic to say -- is a good indication of core communicating with me.
X
X> you asked if i would communicate with core -- as has been seen i have
X> been trying. i'm somewhat dissapointed at the little that i have
X> gotten.
X>
X> What, precisely, did you expect? Chris dealt with all of my concerns
X> at that point. There is no need for each of us to reply to your mail;
X> if we have differing opinions, then we will discuss them amongst
X> ourselves.
X
XChris has expressed to me, a few times, his dissapointment that noone
Xelse has anything public to say on the matter. Chris, do you want to
Xconfirm this? i expressed my dissapointment to Chris as well.
X
X> Provided that it's clear that you in no way speak for the NetBSD
X> project, and disregarding libel for the moment, it is none of our
X> concern what you say to people privately. However, I will remind you
X> that your haste to say `what [you] wanted to', often including
X> vitriolic flames, is part of what got us to this point to being with.
X
XCharles, i feel your answer to be a rather virtiolic flame.
X
Xi'm somewhat unhappy to hear you say what you are saying, or the tone
Xyou use. you are not being nice. i do not understand what you expect
Xto gain from saying things as you have.
END-of-54
echo x - 55
sed 's/^X//' >55 << 'END-of-55'
XReturn-Path: deraadt@theos.com
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LOCALHOST.theos.com by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA03784; Sun, 21 May 95 21:50:52 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9505220350.AA03784@theos.com>
XTo: "Charles M. Hannum"
XCc: deraadt@theos.com, Chris_G_Demetriou@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu,
X core@netbsd.org
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 21 May 1995 23:36:58 EDT."
X <199505220336.XAA18781@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Sun, 21 May 1995 21:50:46 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> this has bothered me a fair bit. the mail suggests that i'm supposed
X> to communicate with the core group, yet when i try to, i get nothing
X> in return.
X>
X> That's *not* true. What you got was a set of questions from Chris,
X> that I, among others, have been waiting to see answered. Your
X> reluctance to answer them is not a step in the right direction.
X
Xfirst, you suggest that you speak for the others as well. this is the
Xfirst time that i have heard anything of the kind -- i was led to
Xbelieve that what Chris posted was what Chris thought, and that he
Xfelt others would speak up. i know you guys have archives -- go read
Xthe mail (i just double checked).
X
Xi do not feel that sending mail to core and receiving mail back from
Xone person -- who expresses to me that he wishes others had something
Xpublic to say -- is a good indication of core communicating with me.
X
X> you asked if i would communicate with core -- as has been seen i have
X> been trying. i'm somewhat dissapointed at the little that i have
X> gotten.
X>
X> What, precisely, did you expect? Chris dealt with all of my concerns
X> at that point. There is no need for each of us to reply to your mail;
X> if we have differing opinions, then we will discuss them amongst
X> ourselves.
X
XChris has expressed to me, a few times, his dissapointment that noone
Xelse has anything public to say on the matter. Chris, do you want to
Xconfirm this? i expressed my dissapointment to Chris as well.
X
X> Provided that it's clear that you in no way speak for the NetBSD
X> project, and disregarding libel for the moment, it is none of our
X> concern what you say to people privately. However, I will remind you
X> that your haste to say `what [you] wanted to', often including
X> vitriolic flames, is part of what got us to this point to being with.
X
XCharles, i feel your answer to be a rather virtiolic flame.
X
Xi'm somewhat unhappy to hear you say what you are saying, or the tone
Xyou use. you are not being nice. i do not understand what you expect
Xto gain from saying things as you have.
END-of-55
echo x - 56
sed 's/^X//' >56 << 'END-of-56'
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA05052; Sun, 21 May 95 22:58:56 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9505220458.AA05052@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa00990;
X 22 May 95 0:58 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: "Charles M. Hannum" , core@netbsd.org
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 21 May 1995 21:50:46 MDT."
X <9505220350.AA03784@theos.com>
XDate: Mon, 22 May 1995 00:58:42 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X[ your second piece of mail first! ]
X
X> > this has bothered me a fair bit. the mail suggests that i'm supposed
X> > to communicate with the core group, yet when i try to, i get nothing
X> > in return.
X> >
X> > That's *not* true. What you got was a set of questions from Chris,
X> > that I, among others, have been waiting to see answered. Your
X> > reluctance to answer them is not a step in the right direction.
X>
X> first, you suggest that you speak for the others as well. this is the
X> first time that i have heard anything of the kind -- i was led to
X> believe that what Chris posted was what Chris thought, and that he
X> felt others would speak up. i know you guys have archives -- go read
X> the mail (i just double checked).
X
XCharles wasn't "speaking for others" -- at most he was echoing
Xopinions that others stated, publically, even:
X
XI posted what I thought. I was waiting for a public answer.
XCharles agreed with Chris thought. Charles was waiting for a public answer.
X
XTherefore, Charles, "among others," was waiting for answers to those
Xquestions.
X
XIt's not as if Charles is inventing something, here...
X
X
X> i do not feel that sending mail to core and receiving mail back from
X> one person -- who expresses to me that he wishes others had something
X> public to say -- is a good indication of core communicating with me.
X
Xcore can 'elect' a representative to "communicate" with you, or can
Xallow somebody to do all of the talking.
X
XWhat i'd expresed -- that i wish there were public comment from the
Xrest of core -- was my desire to _avoid_ being such a "mouth."
X
X
X> Chris has expressed to me, a few times, his dissapointment that noone
X> else has anything public to say on the matter. Chris, do you want to
X> confirm this? i expressed my dissapointment to Chris as well.
X
XI can't disagree with this; a public 'ACK' from others in 'core'
Xwould have been nice. However, it's by no means _necessary_.
X
X
X> > Provided that it's clear that you in no way speak for the NetBSD
X> > project, and disregarding libel for the moment, it is none of our
X> > concern what you say to people privately. However, I will remind you
X> > that your haste to say `what [you] wanted to', often including
X> > vitriolic flames, is part of what got us to this point to being with.
X>
X> Charles, i feel your answer to be a rather virtiolic flame.
X
XUmm, his answer was not particularly vitriolic. Indeed, it wasn't
Xeven a _flame_. It was a (rather calm) statement, in my opinion.
X
X
X> i'm somewhat unhappy to hear you say what you are saying, or the tone
X> you use. you are not being nice. i do not understand what you expect
X> to gain from saying things as you have.
X
XThough i can't say for sure why he wrote what he wrote (because i'm
Xnot him!), it _seems_ to me that the reason that Charles wrote what he
Xwrote was that he felt that you were fundamentally misrepresenting at
Xleast one issue. (Namely, you _did_ receive a response from core,
Xthat you never publically acknowledged.)
X
X
X
X
Xcgd
END-of-56
echo x - 57
sed 's/^X//' >57 << 'END-of-57'
XReplied: Mon, 22 May 1995 01:31:52 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou Theo de Raadt , core@netbsd.org"
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA07582; Mon, 22 May 95 00:16:25 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9505220616.AA07582@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa01072;
X 22 May 95 2:16 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: core@netbsd.org
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 21 May 1995 21:09:04 MDT."
X <9505220309.AA03534@theos.com>
XDate: Mon, 22 May 1995 02:16:09 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X> > sorry it took me so long to respond to this... of course, i've not
X> > seen anybody else respond, either... *sigh*
X>
X> this has bothered me a fair bit. the mail suggests that i'm supposed
X> to communicate with the core group, yet when i try to, i get nothing
X> in return. i don't think that is right.
X
XAs charles noted, this _isn't_ true; you _did_ get a response.
X
XAs I've noted in several places previously, i am less than pleased at
Xthe amount of public backing my response received. However, it _was_
Xa response.
X
X
X> you asked if i would communicate with core -- as has been seen i have
X> been trying. i'm somewhat dissapointed at the little that i have
X> gotten.
X
XThus far, i've seen four messages from you to 'core':
X (1) the initial one, which i responded to
X (2) the second one (yesterday?), which i and paul (i think...)
X responded to
X (3) the third, which charles responded to and which i am no
X responding to, and
X (4) the fourth, in response to charles's message, in which
X you indicated that his message was a "vitriolic flame,"
X apprently because he 'called' you on a statement
X that you made in this one.
X
X
XWhat is communication? Why do i say the above, and the other things
Xthat i've said, in the way that i've said them?
X
XTo me, communication is the honest and open sharing of ideas and
Xfeelings about a particular matter.
X
XThat should pretty much explain where i'm coming from, in this entire
Xconversation. "Honest and open sharing of ideas," in a
Xnon-confrontational environment, is what i want.
X
XFor the most part, i'm relatively unconcerned about this; for the most
Xpart, as long as things stay 'technical' i don't see there being many
Xcommunication problems.
X
XHowever, i _do_ see things like you (apparently) getting angry when
Xyou're corrected about a misrepresentation you've made as being a
Xproblem. If statements you make are less than intellectually honest,
Xand you aren't willing to allow them to pointed out to you, then there
X_is_ a problem. If you aren't willing to even discuss them
X"peacefully" then there's a _serious_ problem.
X
X
X> you also asked how i would react to users; i responded with something
X> like: that if it was a private piece of mail i expected it to be kept
X> private and could say what i wanted to, otherwise you can expect high
X> standards. i think that is fair.
X
XThis is more of a concern to me, honestly.
X
XIt is my firm opinion that, in "professional" environments, you
Xshould behave as if every piece of mail you write _is_ a public
Xmessage. To me, that means that if you're interacting with people
Xworking on NetBSD, or even interested in working on NetBSD, that it
Xshould be "professional," and that even _if_ it is sent from you
Xprivately, that it should be polite, reasonable, etc. (Obviously,
Xpeople should treat you in the same way. However, just because they
Xdon't doesn't give you license to be "non-professional.")
X
XI want _EVERYONE_ working on NetBSD to behave in a professional
Xmanner, in public _AND_ in private. Obviously, the latter can't be
Xenforced, but if people complain about "unprofessional" behaviour,
Xthen it doesn't rightly matter _where_ it occurred.
X
X
X
X
Xchris
END-of-57
echo x - 58
sed 's/^X//' >58 << 'END-of-58'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
Xcc: Theo de Raadt , core@netbsd.org
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 22 May 1995 02:16:09 EDT."
X <9505220616.AA07582@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Mon, 22 May 1995 01:31:51 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> As charles noted, this _isn't_ true; you _did_ get a response.
X>
X> As I've noted in several places previously, i am less than pleased at
X> the amount of public backing my response received. However, it _was_
X> a response.
X
Xyes, i did get one response. i communicated with you (and with paul)
Xthat i had some real problems with what was being asked for in it. if
Xyou forget the details, please go back and read the original mail
Xagain. i feel that i am being singled out to make promises that noone
Xelse is required to make. then i hear that that is because i've been
Xbad. then i am told that no, i won't be told when i was bad. then i
Xhear from some other people that they have some theories or facts
Xabout what actually happened, and that it is really embarrasing to
Xcore. but i don't know what is true. all i know is that i was hurt,
Xand that when i look back at the facts of it, i feel that taking
Xport-sparc away was VERY unfair. but above all, it is clear that i
Xreally only want to be in this for technical reasons, but that clearly
Xisn't enough -- i must make promises. then 20 or so people speak up,
Xand even though i say nothing, a mailing list is moderated so that
Xthings can't get through -- even though (two of?) the people using the
Xcode say that they feel the discussion is very relevant, since it is
Xdisgussing ways to get technical improvements back into the stream.
X
Xso every time i talk to core they want me to say that something -- and
Xi won't be told what specifically it was or be able to defend myself
X-- requires me to admit that i was wrong by making promises that it --
Xwhatever it was -- won't happen again. which is an immediate reminder
Xthat i was treated unfairly.
X
Xi'm sorry, but this smells like a kangaroo court.
X
Xyes, perhaps you consider this misrepresentation of the facts, but it
Xis what i (and others feel the same as me) feel and think. of course i
Xshowed that mail that chris sent to a few people who i talk to often,
Xbecause they are my friends, and i work closely with them. and they
Xtoo were confused as to what to say in reply.
X
Xremember that i have made absolutely no public statements about these
Xhappenings at all, and i think you guys should be happy about that. i
Xcan't help if you take the last sentence as a threat, some of you
Xmight, how would i know -- because i don't know the facts of what i
Xdid to cause this, do I? nothing beyond "you've been bad, you'd been
Xbad before and warned". with a silent implication that none of you bad
Xbeen bad enough cause this to happen to you. i've been told nothing
Xexcept that something -- which i can be told nothing about -- caused
Xme to be kicked out, even though previous instances led to it too, of
Xwhich none have been pointed out. and a perusal of the public mailing
Xlists show that i didn't flame very much.
X
Xso i can only assume it was private mail (or another more local
Xpossibility, which if it was the case, ties in with some other really
Xdigusting and vile politics someone at work did against me), and so
Xprivate mail was used against me. great. i was tempted a few months
Xago to go back into my mail archives and pull out a few other pieces
Xof private mail that i've seen cc'd.
X
Xso, i, left with absolutely no facts about what the thing i did that
Xwas wrong, am supposed to make promises that noone else makes. i'm
Xsupposed to place limits on myself -- that apparently everyone else is
Xassumed to have to stick to, yet with me it cannot be assumed and i
Xhave to make promises. it sounds very reasonable except the cause for
Xme being kicked out remains a secret. to make promises to people who i
Xfeel have been less than straightforward with me. but i've got a
Xlittle header on my mail too now that says my mail can't be
Xforwarded. so you'll never see any of the private mail that i send to
Xanyone, or be able to redistribute it to use it against me, right?
Xbecause if they did, that would be them being unprofessional?
X
Xyes, i'm angry.
X
Xdo you think that i'm supposed to take all this lying down? do you
Xthink it is trivial to approach people who have taken what i love to
Xdo, in the same week while a fellow employee is lying about my actions
Xto my boss and to my friends, and i have tendonitis so badly that i
Xcannot type more than 30 minutes a day or ride my bike; and then even
Xthe way it is announced to the world is quiet, elusive, toned down --
Xthat it is posted to a newsgroup that very few people read, that
Xport-sparc is not even told of me being kicked out, only of me being
Xreplaced?
X
Xwhen i talk of what i love -- am i talking about core? no. i'm talking
Xabout the sparc port. development and enhancement. technical
Xthings. which should not be shrouded by politics if possible. chris
Xmentions often that he finds the politics to be overbearing, yet after
X2 months of talking to you we've progressed very little, if not
Xnowhere. the politics keep dragging on,
X
Xand perhaps this is all just a misrepresentation of the facts by me
Xagain, but it seems as if the politics are severely overshadowing the
Xtechology. and perhaps that's because you feel you need some
Xprotection of some sort, a little letter that allows you later on to
Xsay "you promised, and you didn't do it, and we got you to agree that
Xyour private mail did matter, and the guy did mailbomb you, and you
Xwere angry because he mailbombed you for the wrong reason, but that
Xdoesn't matter because he was a netbsd person, and you should have
Xcome to us so we could tell him to stop mailbombing you because he
Xmisunderstood something you said, so you are out, again."
X
Xam i making all this up? perhaps i am, but you don't have to dream
Xmy dreams.
X
X
X> To me, communication is the honest and open sharing of ideas and
X> feelings about a particular matter.
X
Xthat is what the above is. if it has anger in it, then that is what is
Xin it. it is an honest and open sharing of ideas and feelings. those
Xfeelings include anger, hurt, apprehension, loss. but i'm trying to
Xfind a way to forget about that past stuff, and you're not making it
Xeasy.
X
Xi felt ripped off because i could not make a proper technical
Xcontribution anymore (not having CVS access makes things a lot harder
Xthan expected), i felt ripped off because port-sparc and core were
Xmixed into one bag and both were taken away. i actually felt glad that
Xcore wasn't a worry anymore.
X
Xit took a long time before i even communicated with any of the people
Xanymore -- i was angry because my friends were given spotty
Xinformation (imagine getting mail from an avid follower, 2 months
Xlater, asking what is going on -- he being totally clueless about what
Xhad transpired, and finding nothing in his mailing list archives,
Xthough subscribed to 10 of them -- this happened with a number of
Xpeople -- noone reads that mailing list the message went out to).
X
Xand i kept programming (well, once my hands were slightly better).
Xbecause that is the important part.
X
X> That should pretty much explain where i'm coming from, in this entire
X> conversation. "Honest and open sharing of ideas," in a
X> non-confrontational environment, is what i want.
X
Xthat's what i've done above. i'm trying not to be confrontational -- i
Xam being honest; i am even being honest about my anger. if you think
Xit is confrontational, please go back and read it again as if it
Xwasn't, because quite often i fail to express properly in words.
X
X> However, i _do_ see things like you (apparently) getting angry when
X> you're corrected about a misrepresentation you've made as being a
X> problem.
X
Xthat piece of mail made me angry because once again it said i was bad
Xand then avoided telling me when. these rough outlines of me being bad
Xare not going to be enough if you expect things to work out. i suspect
Xthat core is going to have to either drop that entire "being bad"
Xissue completely, or bring it all to the forefront for a small time --
Xtell me all if it and let me defend myself if i can. it's the fair and
Xmodern way of doing things.
X
Xyou may now tell me that it isn't possible to fill me in on the
Xdetails because it is private, but i don't see how i can accept that.
Xyou cannot expect me to accept guilt for something i know nothing
Xabout, especially when it so easy for someone to be setup via email.
Xthere are many things that were going on in the previous 2 months
Xbefore your actions that you do not know about.
X
X> It is my firm opinion that, in "professional" environments, you
X> should behave as if every piece of mail you write _is_ a public
X> message. To me, that means that if you're interacting with people
X> working on NetBSD, or even interested in working on NetBSD, that it
X> should be "professional," and that even _if_ it is sent from you
X> privately, that it should be polite, reasonable, etc. (Obviously,
X> people should treat you in the same way. However, just because they
X> don't doesn't give you license to be "non-professional.")
X>
X> I want _EVERYONE_ working on NetBSD to behave in a professional
X> manner, in public _AND_ in private. Obviously, the latter can't be
X> enforced, but if people complain about "unprofessional" behaviour,
X> then it doesn't rightly matter _where_ it occurred.
X
Xi want to do technical things, and i want these kinds of discussions
Xover with. you are talking about being polite, yet even this piece of
Xmail (i know you didn't intend it as such, but none the less..), by
Xbringing up bad memories for me -- about things which core refuses to
Xbe straight with me about -- it is not _perceived_ as polite by me.
X
Xso, as i've said before to a number of people, i think we have three
Xchoices before us
X
X(1) you be straight with me about how i was "bad"
X(2) you stop trying to treat me as a special case who must assume
X guilt by fiat
X(3) we just get to technical things
X
Xas long as you struggle to make case (2) happen, you will find that
Xcase (1) is a concern for me. or, we can just get on with (3).
X
Xremember, i've _attempted_ to be honest about my feelings and thoughts.
Xi suspect i've failed.
END-of-58
echo x - 59
sed 's/^X//' >59 << 'END-of-59'
XReplied: Mon, 22 May 1995 15:08:50 -0600
XReplied: "Theo de Raadt "
XReturn-Path: deraadt@theos.com
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LOCALHOST.theos.com by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA07912; Mon, 22 May 95 01:31:53 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9505220731.AA07912@theos.com>
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XCc: Theo de Raadt , core@netbsd.org
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 22 May 1995 02:16:09 EDT."
X <9505220616.AA07582@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Mon, 22 May 1995 01:31:51 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> As charles noted, this _isn't_ true; you _did_ get a response.
X>
X> As I've noted in several places previously, i am less than pleased at
X> the amount of public backing my response received. However, it _was_
X> a response.
X
Xyes, i did get one response. i communicated with you (and with paul)
Xthat i had some real problems with what was being asked for in it. if
Xyou forget the details, please go back and read the original mail
Xagain. i feel that i am being singled out to make promises that noone
Xelse is required to make. then i hear that that is because i've been
Xbad. then i am told that no, i won't be told when i was bad. then i
Xhear from some other people that they have some theories or facts
Xabout what actually happened, and that it is really embarrasing to
Xcore. but i don't know what is true. all i know is that i was hurt,
Xand that when i look back at the facts of it, i feel that taking
Xport-sparc away was VERY unfair. but above all, it is clear that i
Xreally only want to be in this for technical reasons, but that clearly
Xisn't enough -- i must make promises. then 20 or so people speak up,
Xand even though i say nothing, a mailing list is moderated so that
Xthings can't get through -- even though (two of?) the people using the
Xcode say that they feel the discussion is very relevant, since it is
Xdisgussing ways to get technical improvements back into the stream.
X
Xso every time i talk to core they want me to say that something -- and
Xi won't be told what specifically it was or be able to defend myself
X-- requires me to admit that i was wrong by making promises that it --
Xwhatever it was -- won't happen again. which is an immediate reminder
Xthat i was treated unfairly.
X
Xi'm sorry, but this smells like a kangaroo court.
X
Xyes, perhaps you consider this misrepresentation of the facts, but it
Xis what i (and others feel the same as me) feel and think. of course i
Xshowed that mail that chris sent to a few people who i talk to often,
Xbecause they are my friends, and i work closely with them. and they
Xtoo were confused as to what to say in reply.
X
Xremember that i have made absolutely no public statements about these
Xhappenings at all, and i think you guys should be happy about that. i
Xcan't help if you take the last sentence as a threat, some of you
Xmight, how would i know -- because i don't know the facts of what i
Xdid to cause this, do I? nothing beyond "you've been bad, you'd been
Xbad before and warned". with a silent implication that none of you bad
Xbeen bad enough cause this to happen to you. i've been told nothing
Xexcept that something -- which i can be told nothing about -- caused
Xme to be kicked out, even though previous instances led to it too, of
Xwhich none have been pointed out. and a perusal of the public mailing
Xlists show that i didn't flame very much.
X
Xso i can only assume it was private mail (or another more local
Xpossibility, which if it was the case, ties in with some other really
Xdigusting and vile politics someone at work did against me), and so
Xprivate mail was used against me. great. i was tempted a few months
Xago to go back into my mail archives and pull out a few other pieces
Xof private mail that i've seen cc'd.
X
Xso, i, left with absolutely no facts about what the thing i did that
Xwas wrong, am supposed to make promises that noone else makes. i'm
Xsupposed to place limits on myself -- that apparently everyone else is
Xassumed to have to stick to, yet with me it cannot be assumed and i
Xhave to make promises. it sounds very reasonable except the cause for
Xme being kicked out remains a secret. to make promises to people who i
Xfeel have been less than straightforward with me. but i've got a
Xlittle header on my mail too now that says my mail can't be
Xforwarded. so you'll never see any of the private mail that i send to
Xanyone, or be able to redistribute it to use it against me, right?
Xbecause if they did, that would be them being unprofessional?
X
Xyes, i'm angry.
X
Xdo you think that i'm supposed to take all this lying down? do you
Xthink it is trivial to approach people who have taken what i love to
Xdo, in the same week while a fellow employee is lying about my actions
Xto my boss and to my friends, and i have tendonitis so badly that i
Xcannot type more than 30 minutes a day or ride my bike; and then even
Xthe way it is announced to the world is quiet, elusive, toned down --
Xthat it is posted to a newsgroup that very few people read, that
Xport-sparc is not even told of me being kicked out, only of me being
Xreplaced?
X
Xwhen i talk of what i love -- am i talking about core? no. i'm talking
Xabout the sparc port. development and enhancement. technical
Xthings. which should not be shrouded by politics if possible. chris
Xmentions often that he finds the politics to be overbearing, yet after
X2 months of talking to you we've progressed very little, if not
Xnowhere. the politics keep dragging on,
X
Xand perhaps this is all just a misrepresentation of the facts by me
Xagain, but it seems as if the politics are severely overshadowing the
Xtechology. and perhaps that's because you feel you need some
Xprotection of some sort, a little letter that allows you later on to
Xsay "you promised, and you didn't do it, and we got you to agree that
Xyour private mail did matter, and the guy did mailbomb you, and you
Xwere angry because he mailbombed you for the wrong reason, but that
Xdoesn't matter because he was a netbsd person, and you should have
Xcome to us so we could tell him to stop mailbombing you because he
Xmisunderstood something you said, so you are out, again."
X
Xam i making all this up? perhaps i am, but you don't have to dream
Xmy dreams.
X
X
X> To me, communication is the honest and open sharing of ideas and
X> feelings about a particular matter.
X
Xthat is what the above is. if it has anger in it, then that is what is
Xin it. it is an honest and open sharing of ideas and feelings. those
Xfeelings include anger, hurt, apprehension, loss. but i'm trying to
Xfind a way to forget about that past stuff, and you're not making it
Xeasy.
X
Xi felt ripped off because i could not make a proper technical
Xcontribution anymore (not having CVS access makes things a lot harder
Xthan expected), i felt ripped off because port-sparc and core were
Xmixed into one bag and both were taken away. i actually felt glad that
Xcore wasn't a worry anymore.
X
Xit took a long time before i even communicated with any of the people
Xanymore -- i was angry because my friends were given spotty
Xinformation (imagine getting mail from an avid follower, 2 months
Xlater, asking what is going on -- he being totally clueless about what
Xhad transpired, and finding nothing in his mailing list archives,
Xthough subscribed to 10 of them -- this happened with a number of
Xpeople -- noone reads that mailing list the message went out to).
X
Xand i kept programming (well, once my hands were slightly better).
Xbecause that is the important part.
X
X> That should pretty much explain where i'm coming from, in this entire
X> conversation. "Honest and open sharing of ideas," in a
X> non-confrontational environment, is what i want.
X
Xthat's what i've done above. i'm trying not to be confrontational -- i
Xam being honest; i am even being honest about my anger. if you think
Xit is confrontational, please go back and read it again as if it
Xwasn't, because quite often i fail to express properly in words.
X
X> However, i _do_ see things like you (apparently) getting angry when
X> you're corrected about a misrepresentation you've made as being a
X> problem.
X
Xthat piece of mail made me angry because once again it said i was bad
Xand then avoided telling me when. these rough outlines of me being bad
Xare not going to be enough if you expect things to work out. i suspect
Xthat core is going to have to either drop that entire "being bad"
Xissue completely, or bring it all to the forefront for a small time --
Xtell me all if it and let me defend myself if i can. it's the fair and
Xmodern way of doing things.
X
Xyou may now tell me that it isn't possible to fill me in on the
Xdetails because it is private, but i don't see how i can accept that.
Xyou cannot expect me to accept guilt for something i know nothing
Xabout, especially when it so easy for someone to be setup via email.
Xthere are many things that were going on in the previous 2 months
Xbefore your actions that you do not know about.
X
X> It is my firm opinion that, in "professional" environments, you
X> should behave as if every piece of mail you write _is_ a public
X> message. To me, that means that if you're interacting with people
X> working on NetBSD, or even interested in working on NetBSD, that it
X> should be "professional," and that even _if_ it is sent from you
X> privately, that it should be polite, reasonable, etc. (Obviously,
X> people should treat you in the same way. However, just because they
X> don't doesn't give you license to be "non-professional.")
X>
X> I want _EVERYONE_ working on NetBSD to behave in a professional
X> manner, in public _AND_ in private. Obviously, the latter can't be
X> enforced, but if people complain about "unprofessional" behaviour,
X> then it doesn't rightly matter _where_ it occurred.
X
Xi want to do technical things, and i want these kinds of discussions
Xover with. you are talking about being polite, yet even this piece of
Xmail (i know you didn't intend it as such, but none the less..), by
Xbringing up bad memories for me -- about things which core refuses to
Xbe straight with me about -- it is not _perceived_ as polite by me.
X
Xso, as i've said before to a number of people, i think we have three
Xchoices before us
X
X(1) you be straight with me about how i was "bad"
X(2) you stop trying to treat me as a special case who must assume
X guilt by fiat
X(3) we just get to technical things
X
Xas long as you struggle to make case (2) happen, you will find that
Xcase (1) is a concern for me. or, we can just get on with (3).
X
Xremember, i've _attempted_ to be honest about my feelings and thoughts.
Xi suspect i've failed.
END-of-59
echo x - 60
sed 's/^X//' >60 << 'END-of-60'
XTo: Paul Kranenburg
XSubject: Re: back
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 22 May 1995 10:52:33 +0200."
X <9505220852.AA27413@cs.few.eur.nl>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Mon, 22 May 1995 02:56:13 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xi just talked with chris on the phone. we got through a lot of it.
Xfinally i got some straight poop on what the story had been. he said
Xsomething like that he was glad i showed that i was still angry -- i
Xwas being real i guess.
X
Xi don't think you've failed me; i think the process has had something
Xwrong with it. i feel better now that i've told chris some things that
Xhe did not know before, i also feel better now that he's told me some
Xthings that i did not know.
X
Xperhaps this will soon be over.
X
Xby the way, it looks like i've solved the bootpath problem completely.
Xwell, except for one very minor little thing: it does not currently
Xhonour lun's on sun4 machines for the bootpath. pretty darn minor, eh?
Xoh -- and it makes dk_establish() safe for all drivers to use.
END-of-60
echo x - 61
sed 's/^X//' >61 << 'END-of-61'
XForwarded: Wed, 24 May 1995 12:30:59 -0600
XForwarded: "chuck "
XTo: cgd@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: hi
XDate: Mon, 22 May 1995 03:33:33 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xi managed to find this one piece of mail. it is the only one i found
X-- but i think i recall a second instance where i was told the same
Xthing -- i think it was earlier, but do not remember if it was mail or
Xvoice.
X
Xi'll just leave the relevant pieces, and am sure you can find it by
Xthe Message-Id. let me know if you want the full message.
X
X----------------------------------------------------------------------
XDate: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:15:47 -0400
XMessage-Id: <199504210015.UAA11247@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
XFrom: "Charles M. Hannum"
XTo: miguel@roxanne.nuclecu.unam.mx
XCc: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XSubject: Re: 4/X00 support from theo (Was: Sparc 20 ?)
X
X[...]
X3) It was not a single user, or a single incident, and it occured over
Xa long period of time.
X
X[...]
X
XI think it's reasonably clear that only people in the `core' group
Xknow the details of this, and we consider much of the information to
Xbe confidential.
X
X----------------------------------------------------------------------
X
Xi read the first chunk as "it wasn't jonathan" (note: miguel implied
Xin the previous mail that it was the jonathan situation), and i read
Xthe second chunk as "only core knows about it -- theo doesn't"
X(whether that means "all" or "some" of the details is unclear, but
Xcoupled together the two statements read as "it wasn't a single
Xincident, therefore it couldn't be jonathan, therefore theo has no
Xidea what caused it, and won't be told."
X
Xthe port-pmax mailing where i defended myself, that didn't go out --
Xit was in response to jonathan flaming me. charles deleted it, and i
Xdon't think you ever saw it. sorry, i don't have a copy of that. (i
Xdidn't have Fcc: working yet..)
X
Xi suspect you have more pieces of the jonathan mail saga archived in
Xyour mail folders than i do -- well, easier to access. it looks like i
Xhad not yet switched over fully to mh-e at that time -- it scares me
Xwhen i think that that mail is archived deep in my old 15M archive
Xdirectory..
X
Xpaul just phoned me. he said that he just wants to get back to
Xtechnical things, and skip over this. i said i'd talked to you, and
Xexplained the bit about stuck in corners and nobody wanting to lose
Xface. he replied that we should just move past that.
X
Xapparently his 4/400 code as in the tree works a lot better than i had
Xthought; he is just missing iocache support, so his hangup is that he
Xcannot boot off diskless root because after the 3nd packet the machine
Xcomplains about dma botches of some kind. that is very exciting,
Xbecause it means that i'm free to do sun4m pmap merging at any time.
X
Xi was up at 9am, climbed a mountain, hiked 6 km through 4ft deep slush
X(the image you are supposed to get is of 12 million overturned slurpee
Xcups, and of geting your groin wet in slurpee), nearly died eating
Xbeef vindaloo, wrote some code, talked on the phone, wrote mail, and
Xnow it's almost 4am and this is absolutely beyond ridiculous.
END-of-61
echo x - 62
sed 's/^X//' >62 << 'END-of-62'
XReturn-Path: jconklin@netcom.com
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from netcom20.netcom.com by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA11841; Mon, 22 May 95 14:28:28 MDT
XReceived: by netcom20.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom)
X id NAA12410; Mon, 22 May 1995 13:25:32 -0700
XFrom: jconklin@netcom.com (J.T. Conklin)
XMessage-Id: <199505222025.NAA12410@netcom20.netcom.com>
XSubject: CVS Access
XTo: core@netbsd.org
XDate: Mon, 22 May 1995 13:25:30 -0700 (PDT)
XCc: deraadt@theos.com
XX-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
XMime-Version: 1.0
XContent-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
XContent-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
XContent-Length: 787
X
XOuch. I feel the heat rising... It shouldn't have to be this way.
X
XThe facts as I understand them are that the two question Chris asked
Xon behalf of core were:
X
X (1) can core & theo communicate well with each other.
X (2) can theo promise not to stomp on anybody's toes.
X
XAs far as I know, these questions have not been answered. I get the
Ximpression that Theo feels that we are holding him to a higher
Xstandard because of past behavior.
X
XI don't think we are. If anything, we are making the requirements
Xthat have been implicit when direct CVS access was granted in the past
Xexplicit. I think anyone who has direct CVS access has to be held to
Xthese same standards.
X
XConversely, anyone who can not, or is unwilling, to agree to them should
Xnot be granted direct CVS access.
X
X --jtc
END-of-62
echo x - 63
sed 's/^X//' >63 << 'END-of-63'
XReturn-Path: pk@cs.few.eur.nl
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl (kaa.cs.few.eur.nl) by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA15905; Tue, 23 May 95 03:52:49 MDT
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA04678; Tue, 23 May 95 11:52:30 +0200
XDate: Tue, 23 May 95 11:52:30 +0200
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9505230952.AA04678@cs.few.eur.nl>
XTo: core@NetBSD.ORG
XSubject: Re: CVS Access
XCc: deraadt@theos.com
X
X> I think anyone who has direct CVS access has to be held to
X> these same standards.
X>
X> Conversely, anyone who can not, or is unwilling, to agree to them should
X> not be granted direct CVS access.
X
X
XYes, well put. I actually meant to say the same thing im my prev message,
Xbut worded it more clumsily.
X
X-pk
X
END-of-63
echo x - 64
sed 's/^X//' >64 << 'END-of-64'
XReplied: Thu, 25 May 1995 16:54:16 -0600
XReplied: "miguel@roxanne.nuclecu.unam.mx, mouse@Collatz.McRCIM.McGill.EDU,
XReplied: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG "
XReplied: Thu, 25 May 1995 16:38:42 -0600
XReplied: "chuck "
XReturn-Path: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from pain.lcs.mit.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA07946; Thu, 25 May 95 15:47:26 MDT
XReceived: (from daemon@localhost) by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id PAA10431; Thu, 25 May 1995 15:54:38 -0400
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA10427 for ; Thu, 25 May 1995 15:54:35 -0400
XMessage-Id: <199505251954.PAA10427@pain.lcs.mit.edu>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa20535;
X 25 May 95 15:53 EDT
XTo: miguel@roxanne.nuclecu.unam.mx
XCc: mouse@Collatz.McRCIM.McGill.EDU, port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XReply-To: cgd@NetBSD.ORG
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: theo's changes
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 25 May 1995 11:50:05 MDT."
X <9505251750.AA05135@roxanne.nuclecu.unam.mx>
XDate: Thu, 25 May 1995 15:53:31 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
XSender: owner-port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
XPrecedence: list
XX-Loop: port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG
X
XI am going to send exactly one last message in public about this.
XPeriod. I've set replies to cgd@netbsd.org. I would ask that you
Xrefrain from public discussion, and let port-sparc continue to be a
Xtechnically-oriented mailing list. If you feel that you must comment
Xpublically, have a ball; i'm the port-sparc owner and sometime
Xmoderator, and i'm going to let you folks flame all you want about
Xthis issue, until you're all sick of it and until you realize that you
Xhave more important and productive things to do.
X
X
X
XMiguel de Icaza said:
X
X> Well, you won't believe why Theo was asked to leave the core group,
X> but it was something violent and may forward you a bunch of mail I got
X> from Theo about this. I lost two days talking with Chris about this,
X> and they won't admit that it was a mistake from their part and not
X> from Theo. They won't talk about it and won't tell you the thruth, I
X> got their original mail to Theo, and believe me, it's not nice at all.
X
XThe original message included in the headers the following:
X
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1994, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
X
XThat means that, if you received a copy which wasn't authorized by me
X(and none were, except to the original recipients), it was forwarded
Xto you illegally. If you forward it to others without my permission,
Xyou are breaking the laws of your country, if you happen to be living
Xin a country that is a signatory to the Berne Convention. (That
Xincludes Mexico and Canada, and a whole bunch of others.)
X
XAs for your comments about why it happened, see below. I've said the
Xsame thing several times before.
X
X
X> Fortunatelly, after spending those days talking with Chris, they will
X> give access to the cvs tree to Theo.
X
XWe have stated several times that we will give Theo access to the CVS
Xtree if and only if:
X
X (1) He agrees to not abuse or harass users, developers, or
X potential users or developers of NetBSD, or
X behave in an otherwise unprofessional manner when
X dealing with that same set of people,
X
X (2) He makes some effort to communicate with 'core', and
X
X (3) we believe we can trust theo to work in the source tree
X non-disruptively.
X
XAll of those are necessary, for somewhat obvious reasons:
X
XThe former is necessary, because someone -- ANYONE -- who has NetBSD
XCVS tree access is implicitly someone associated with NetBSD, and
Xtherefore reflects on the project. As noted, Theo _has_ a history of
Xbeing overbearing, abusive, and downright obscene in communications
Xwith the class of people mentioned above, and _many_ complaints about
Xhim have been received by various 'core' members over time.
X
XThe second is important, because if Theo is to have CVS tree access,
Xthen he _must_ have a good working relationship with 'core'. That is
Xobvious.
X
XThe latter is vital; if he can't be trusted to work non-disruptively
Xin the source tree, well, then him having source tree access is a
Xvery, very big lose. I'm not concerned about this; I believe that
XTheo is honest, and good for his word once he commits to it.
X(However, this belief is tempered by the fact that he's apparently
Xforwarded e-mail that i sent illegally, without my consnet.)
X
X
X> Core asked Theo to leave the group based on "receiving a considerable
X> amount of complaints about the fact that you seem to harass and abuse
X> both users and developers of NetBSD". The facts were others, I could
X> collect some of the mail I got.
X
XIndeed, not long after the project started, complaints started rolling
Xin about Theo. The final straw was that he told a developer (who was
Xworking on the pmax port) to stop "shoving [his; the developer's] cock
Xdown [his; theo's] throat."
X
XTheo will be glad to tell you, i'm sure, that this was in response to
Xanother series of arguments, a more personal series of arguments, or
Xmany such things. However, the point is, THIS IS NOT THE LANGUAGE
XTHAT A "PROFESSIONAL" USES, and it is _completely_ unacceptable for a
Xrepresentative (in 'core' or not) to treat a user or developer like
Xthis. It is unprofessional, asinine, and OBSCENE. It doesn't matter
Xthat or if the comment was provoked; it should NEVER, EVER have
Xbeen made.
X
XIt was decided (by a unanimous vote of the members of 'core',
Xexcluding theo) that we needed to at least remove Theo from 'core,'
Xand thus publically indicate that he was no longer an 'official'
Xrepresentative of the NetBSD project. There was a slight problem: we
Xexpected him to be _quite_ angry with us for our action. We therefore
Xthought it necessary to take what i would term "hostile employee"
Xprecautions -- we turned off his account on the various NetBSD
Xdevelopment machines on which he had accounts, changed the root
Xpasswords, etc.
X
XSince his account was disabled, Theo has:
X
X (1) refused to acknowledge that his actions and statements
X were unprofessional, damaging to the project, and
X 'wrong,' and has gone to great lengths to rationalize
X them, and has
X
X (2) refused to indicate in any way that he would in the future
X attempt to behave in a professional manner -- in both
X public and private communications wherever the project
X might be effected.
X
XI don't particularly care about the former. However, the latter is
X_vitally_ important, because if he's going to be in any way a
Xrepresentative of the project (even as much as being a person with CVS
Xtree access or being a port maintainer implies) then we _must_ be sure
Xthat the mistakes of the past are not to be repeated.
X
X
X> Most of them are copyrighted, and
X> Chris, for instance, insisted on not making them public: he may have
X> some reason. Fact: he was not telling the truth.
X
X"BZZZ! TRY AGAIN!"
X
XI have:
X
X (1) been honest in my representation of the situation to
X people, when i've discussed it at all. (There are
X good reasons not to discuss it, such as privacy
X concerns and the fact that entire situation is
X amazingly stupid.)
X
X (2) gone far out of my way, in many instances, to try to
X explain what was going on, the reasoning behind
X it, and the hopeful outcomes. Most of that was in
X private mail.
X
X (3) gone far out of my way, at several times, to understand
X the position from which you and others (including
X Theo; i've spent over two hours on the phone with
X him discussing this matter) are speaking.
X
X
XAll that Theo has to do to satisfy _me_ (I can't speak for the other
Xmembers of 'core' -- at least two of the other three of them have to
Xbe satisfied as well) that he should be given access to the source
Xtree is give his word, in good faith that:
X
X (1) he will try his best to work constructively with the
X members of 'core' and the various port maintainers
X and others who have CVS tree access, and
X
X (2) he will display a "professional" attitude, and communicate,
X in both public and private, in a no less than a
X "professional" manner with current and potential users
X and developers of NetBSD.
X
XBoth of those are expected implicitly of the people who are given source
Xtree access. Because of past events, I feel that it's necessary for
XTheo to explicitly agree to them before he can be given source tree
Xaccess or accounts on NetBSD developement machines again.
X
XRead those carefully: there's _NOTHING_ in any way objectionable in
Xeither of them, assuming that one (a) wants to actively work to
Ximprove the NetBSD project, and (b) believes that "professional" conduct
Xis appropriate in business-like situations.
X
X
XAnyway, that's it from me on this topic. "Flame away!" 8-)
X
XIf anybody wants to discuss this with me or 'core' in private mail,
Xfeel free to send it. However, at this point, i think you're going to
Xhave a relatively hard time convincing me that i'm asking for too
X_much_.
X
X
X
Xlater,
X
Xchris
END-of-64
echo x - 65
sed 's/^X//' >65 << 'END-of-65'
XTo: Jason Thorpe
XSubject: Re: theo's changes
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 25 May 1995 18:05:59 PDT."
X <199505260105.SAA14791@lestat.nas.nasa.gov>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Thu, 25 May 1995 19:21:05 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> Ok...you're an ISP now, right? If so, I imagine you're prepared to take
X> phone calls and or emails about abusive users, yes?
X
Xno, i'm not an ISP. i just have my own machine here. and if someone
Xcalled me about one of my friends on my machine being abusive i'd just
Xtell the person at the other end that it's none of my business. noone
Xon my machine pays -- they are all friends, and as such their private
Xlittle lives are none of their business unless they cause me
Xproblems. if someone phones me to bitch about one my friends, i hold
Xthe person who called me responsible for being a pain in the ass.
X
X> I mean, Theo and I have had our differences in the past; I seem to
X> remember a good one about diffs to the sb driver I sent in one day. But
X> it's obvious to me that it's possible to get past that kinda stuff,
X> proven by the fact that we were able to work constructively later on.
X> TBH, I don't see why that can't just happen now.
X
Xyes. i remember i was right :-) :-) hahaha!
X
X> Perhaps the `right' solution is a compromise:
X> (These are greatly paraphrased...)
X>
X> a) Theo will communicate effectively with `core'.
X> b) Theo will work well with other current and potential
X> NetBSD users and developers, whether or not they have
X> CVS access.
X> c) Theo will conduct himself in a professional manner when
X> representing the project.
X> d) `Professionalism' will not be a consideration when
X> communication is clearly personal.
X>
X> The first three are basically Chris's. The last one is basically
X> Theo's. I don't really see _any_ of this as unreasonable. These are
X> basically the rules that everyone where I work follows...they're the
X> unspoken kind that everyone seems to understand...
X
Xthat last one is exactly what i have been saying for a while, and
Xthey've not accepted it. also, it clearly is what got me kicked out
Xbefore -- so i suspect that is why they are being sticklers about
Xit. it says "we made a mistake".
X
X> Ok -- it's an idea. Do with it what you will. But, for the sake of
X> _everyone's_ sanity (even those not directly involved), _please_ just
X> come to some sort of agreement so we can all just get on with our lives.
X
Xthat's what i've been trying for. i've got mail to back that up if
Xit ever came to that. i've been insulted by their mail multiple times
Xsince trying to get back in. it's ridiculous. professionalism when
Xcharles yells at me in mail?
X
X> I'm going to bike the 20-ish miles home now...I'm sure there'll be some
X> sort of reply by the time I get there... :-)
X
Xmy bike is fucked, i'm about to spend $500 on it to replace broken
Xcomponents. the entire power train is toast after 7 years of reusing
Xparts like rings, cranks, etc.
X
Xthis mail is just to you... i have nothing more to say to core.
END-of-65
echo x - 66
sed 's/^X//' >66 << 'END-of-66'
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA15253; Fri, 26 May 95 16:36:17 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9505262236.AA15253@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa21644;
X 26 May 95 18:35 EDT
XTo: Keith Moore
XCc: Theo de Raadt , cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: may I respectfully suggest...
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 25 May 1995 23:24:26 EDT."
X <199505260324.XAA20083@wilma.cs.utk.edu>
XDate: Fri, 26 May 1995 18:35:30 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X> ...that all parties agree to dismiss what has happened in the past.
X
XI've already stated that i'm willing to do that _EXCEPT_ inasumch as
Xit is an indicator of something happening in the future.
X
XTo ignore the past when contemplating the future is foolhardy, at best.
X
X> All people sometimes say imprudent things, let their temper get the
X> better of them, overreact, or are simply misunderstood. There's
X> really no way to decide whether someone was right or wrong. Anyone
X> trying to judge the situation will interpret it according to his/her
X> own biases anyway.
X>
X> Furthermore, such damage as has been done cannot be undone. Some
X> people will feel insulted or slighted or mistreated about what
X> happened in the past, no matter what Theo and/or the NetBSD core team
X> choose to do about this in the future. But if people agree to stop
X> arguing about what happened, the events now being discussed will
X> eventually become irrelevant.
X
XYup.
X
X> (I realize that there *has* been an effort to avoid public discussion
X> of this; but recently it's starting to look like a trial. If this
X> issue can be resolved so that Theo can help out, I'll be glad that it
X> came up. But I don't think it helps anyone to have a public trial.)
X
XIf you'll note, all along, until my recent message, 'core' has done
Xwhat it could to keep the details out of the public eye -- FOR JUST
XTHAT PURPOSE. It's in nobody's interests to have theo's actions
Xjudged publically, because as noted, the complete story can probably
Xnever be known.
X
XOn the other hand, we feel as if people have been trying to hold a
X"trial of public opinion" with us as the defendants, and that is
Xsimply NOT acceptable. I am pleased to report that the mail that i've
Xreceived in response to my posting has been largely positive.
X
X> + to privately attempt to reach a clear and mutually agreeable
X> understanding about what limitations on future public conduct,
X> and what level of involvement on Theo's part would be consistent
X> with whatever restrictions on conduct he is willing to agree to.
X
XI have spent a lot of time trying to do that, and a lot of money in
Xphone bills. My message to port-sparc was and is my final position on
Xthe issue.
X
XNote that (despite what theo claimed in public) it _didn't_ and
Xdoesn't try to regulate what he does in 'personal' relationships, only
Xin ones that impact the NetBSD project. in particular, i said:
X
X> (1) He agrees to not abuse or harass users, developers, or
X> potential users or developers of NetBSD, or
X> behave in an otherwise unprofessional manner when
X> dealing with that same set of people,
X
X'potential' has the 'reasonable' definition: while John Q. Homelessguy
Xis a _potential_ user of NetBSD, he isn't one given a 'reasonable'
Xdefinition of 'potential.' Similarly, J. Q. Random out on the net,
Xunless he or she has expressed interest in some form about NetBSD,
Xisn't a 'potential' user. However, i believe charles's "Employee"
Xanalogy, that he posted to port-sparc, is a valid one.
X
XWe expect all NetBSD developers to behave in a professional manner
Xwhen dealing with people who work on or are interested in working on
XNetBSD. Among other things, "professional" behaviour means (to me)
Xnot stooping to other person's level, if they're acting like a
Xthree-year-old.
X
XIf Theo cannot commit to behaving professionally when dealing with
Xpeople that are or are potentially interested in NetBSD, then he can't
Xhave access to the source tree.
X
X
X
Xchris
END-of-66
echo x - 67
sed 's/^X//' >67 << 'END-of-67'
XReplied: Mon, 29 May 1995 00:07:12 -0600
XReplied: "Paul Kranenburg "
XReturn-Path: pk@cs.few.eur.nl
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from cs.few.eur.nl (kaa.cs.few.eur.nl) by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA23199; Sun, 28 May 95 05:31:42 MDT
XReceived: by cs.few.eur.nl (5.67/EUR)
X id AA24477; Sun, 28 May 95 13:12:27 +0200
XFrom: Paul Kranenburg
XMessage-Id: <9505281112.AA24477@cs.few.eur.nl>
XSubject: Re: theo's changes
XTo: deraadt@theos.com (Theo de Raadt)
XDate: Sun, 28 May 1995 13:12:27 +0200 (MET DST)
XCc: core@netbsd.org
XIn-Reply-To: <9505252254.AA08168@theos.com> from "Theo de Raadt" at May 25, 95 04:54:16 pm
XX-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13]
XMime-Version: 1.0
XContent-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
XContent-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
XContent-Length: 953
X
X> i have agreed to all these points -- many times now
XWell, that should clear most obstacles, don't you think?
X
X> -- except one piece:
X> i do not accept that my private mail IN A PERSONAL SETTING can be used
X> against me.
X
XI agree to this. There's just a tiny problem of not having full control
Xon the "personal" attributes in circumstances where such a personal feud
Xstarted out as a discussion on NetBSD topics, especially when initiated
Xon a public forum. On such occasions one could _say_ that it has now
Xbecome a personal matter, but this is likely not going to be perceived
Xthat way out-siders. This is something a professional (to paraphrase Chris)
Xshould care about even if those out-siders don't have a clue.
X
XI do not think it is worth the trouble to try and formulate anything more
Xprecise in this matter. Common sense and a pragmatic attitude should do
Xthe trick. There's nothing unnatural in expecting this from one another,
Xis there?
X
X-pk
END-of-67
echo x - 68
sed 's/^X//' >68 << 'END-of-68'
XTo: Paul Kranenburg
XSubject: Re: theo's changes
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 28 May 1995 13:12:27 +0200."
X <9505281112.AA24477@cs.few.eur.nl>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Mon, 29 May 1995 00:07:12 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> > i have agreed to all these points -- many times now
X> Well, that should clear most obstacles, don't you think?
X
Xi should have thought so.
X
X> > -- except one piece:
X> > i do not accept that my private mail IN A PERSONAL SETTING can be used
X> > against me.
X>
X> I agree to this. There's just a tiny problem of not having full control
X> on the "personal" attributes in circumstances where such a personal feud
X> started out as a discussion on NetBSD topics, especially when initiated
X> on a public forum. On such occasions one could _say_ that it has now
X> become a personal matter, but this is likely not going to be perceived
X> that way out-siders. This is something a professional (to paraphrase Chris)
X> should care about even if those out-siders don't have a clue.
X
Xbut if it was personal -- and it certainly was private mail -- then there
Xis something along the following lines:
X
X i sent mail in my defence to port-pmax, and charles deleted it.
X did you ever see this mail where i defended myself and included
X excerpts of what jonathan said to me in mail, which clearly took
X it to a personal level? did you ever see anything which suggested
X it was not a personal situation? if not, does that mean you perhaps
X judged me without knowing all the facts? you, as a member of core
X -- in a professional role. and then.. perhaps other members of core
X did so too, or well.. you figure out the rest of the details. i
X was left out of the process completely.
X
Xbtw: the mail between jonathan and I did NOT happen on a public forum
X-- they were initiated because I saw something in the source regarding
Xcaching on mips cpu's -- when i was reading the IDT mips book -- and i
Xsent him mail.
X
Xi don't think you had sufficient information when you voted.
X
X> I do not think it is worth the trouble to try and formulate anything more
X> precise in this matter. Common sense and a pragmatic attitude should do
X> the trick. There's nothing unnatural in expecting this from one another,
X> is there?
X
Xi do think it is worthwhile to formulate such issues; also once they
Xare formulated, i think that people working on netbsd should be told
Xpublically what rights they can expect to still retain.
X
Xi'll just keep climbing mountains and working on other ports until the
Xissue is resolved. i'm very tired of talking about it, paul, and it
XREALLY ruins my days and nights. i was shaking a few days ago when i
Xread my mail. i just about deleted the sources that day. anyways, i'll
Xlikely drive down to the desert for a couple of days to camp and
Xchase & catalog some desert tortoises (helping some US army
Xenvironmental assessment people who are good friends with my roomate)
X
END-of-68
echo x - 69
sed 's/^X//' >69 << 'END-of-69'
XReplied: Mon, 29 May 1995 09:56:56 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA28642; Mon, 29 May 95 06:57:01 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9505291257.AA28642@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa25468;
X 29 May 95 8:56 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: theo's changes
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 25 May 1995 16:54:16 MDT."
X <9505252254.AA08168@theos.com>
XDate: Mon, 29 May 1995 08:56:27 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
XYou said:
X> it's been 3 months
X> that i've been talking to you, and it feels like no headway has been
X> made.
X
XI suggest you look at your calendar and/or copies of saved mail.
XThe first time i talked to you about you getting back access to the
XNetBSD was on 4/20, a month and a week ago. Indeed, the first thing i
Xhave saved in my mail (here) about it was dated 4/20, as well.
X
X(I can only assume that you were talking about me, when you said
X"you," because you _were_ responding to my e-mail...)
X
X
X
X
Xcgd
END-of-69
echo x - 70
sed 's/^X//' >70 << 'END-of-70'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: theo's changes
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 29 May 1995 08:56:27 EDT."
X <9505291257.AA28642@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Mon, 29 May 1995 09:56:57 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> You said:
X> > it's been 3 months
X> > that i've been talking to you, and it feels like no headway has been
X> > made.
X>
X> I suggest you look at your calendar and/or copies of saved mail.
X> The first time i talked to you about you getting back access to the
X> NetBSD was on 4/20, a month and a week ago. Indeed, the first thing i
X> have saved in my mail (here) about it was dated 4/20, as well.
X>
X> (I can only assume that you were talking about me, when you said
X> "you," because you _were_ responding to my e-mail...)
X
Xyou are a member of the netbsd core, and i was talking to another
Xmember of core (pk) 3 months ago, about all this. you means "core".
Xif this had been spanish it would have been more clear.
END-of-70
echo x - 71
sed 's/^X//' >71 << 'END-of-71'
XReplied: Tue, 30 May 1995 17:07:13 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou deraadt@theos.com, cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU, core@netbsd.org"
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA12928; Tue, 30 May 95 05:41:22 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9505301141.AA12928@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa26482;
X 30 May 95 7:39 EDT
XTo: deraadt@theos.com
XCc: cgd@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU, core@netbsd.org
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Where to go from here?
XDate: Tue, 30 May 1995 07:39:49 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
XTheo:
X
XFor the last couple of days, we've been at what appears to be an impasse.
XIn a nutshell (as i see it):
X
X You want to make sure that (at least some) of your mail is
X considered "personal," and not to be interpreted in any way
X with the NetBSD project.
X
X We ("core") need to know that that communications that relate
X to the NetBSD project -- even if made in private mail -- take
X a "professional" tone, and reflect positively on the project.
X
X
XDo you have any suggestions that would satisfy your requirement and
Xours? Various ideas have been tossed out by various people (e.g. only
Xsending NetBSD-related mail from a certain e-mail address, including
Xdisclaimers when you're not sending "NetBSD-related" mail, etc.), and
Xi'm wondering what _you_ think a workable solution would be.
X
X
Xchris
END-of-71
echo x - 72
sed 's/^X//' >72 << 'END-of-72'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
Xcc: deraadt@theos.com, cgd@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu, core@netbsd.org
XSubject: Re: Where to go from here?
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 30 May 1995 07:39:49 EDT."
X <9505301141.AA12928@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Tue, 30 May 1995 17:07:13 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> For the last couple of days, we've been at what appears to be an impasse.
X> In a nutshell (as i see it):
X>
X> You want to make sure that (at least some) of your mail is
X> considered "personal," and not to be interpreted in any way
X> with the NetBSD project.
X>
X> We ("core") need to know that that communications that relate
X> to the NetBSD project -- even if made in private mail -- take
X> a "professional" tone, and reflect positively on the project.
X>
X>
X> Do you have any suggestions that would satisfy your requirement and
X> ours? Various ideas have been tossed out by various people (e.g. only
X> sending NetBSD-related mail from a certain e-mail address, including
X> disclaimers when you're not sending "NetBSD-related" mail, etc.), and
X> i'm wondering what _you_ think a workable solution would be.
X
Xi am willing to accept any terms and methods that all other
Xnetbsd-involved persons accept and use with their own personal mails.
END-of-72
echo x - 73
sed 's/^X//' >73 << 'END-of-73'
XTo: pk@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: 4/400
XDate: Wed, 31 May 1995 02:37:45 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xthe 4/400 deal fell through; larry phoned and said someone offered him
Xbig bucks -- he asked if i would be kind enough to let him sell to
Xthat person instead; i said yes (reluctantly) and he thanked me for
Xbeing "cool about it".
X
Xhow much further have you gotten?
END-of-73
echo x - 74
sed 's/^X//' >74 << 'END-of-74'
XTo: Paul Kranenburg
XSubject: Re: 4/400
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 31 May 1995 10:54:12 +0200."
X <9505310854.AA21736@cs.few.eur.nl>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 31 May 1995 03:31:18 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> I spent all of monday evening getting the bloody obio if_ie driver to work,
X> without success. The receiver is Ok, but I can get only transmit packets < 86
X> in length. Anything bigger results in a xmit interrupt with status
X> "DMA underrun".
X
Xit definately works; there is a 4/100 somewhere in the US with an obio
Xie card that has been running solidly for over 35 days now.
X
Xpossibly your 87th byte is in a new page?
X
X> I'm not using the IO cache. I don;t know whether the board is somehow
X> wired to require that (i'd be surprised if it was).
X
Xi think it is required. if you like, ask larry, who happens to know a
Xguy who worked a lot on the 4/400. i believe the guy's name is narrad,
Xbut i might be wrong.
END-of-74
echo x - 75
sed 's/^X//' >75 << 'END-of-75'
XTo: port-sparc@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: ouch
XDate: Wed, 31 May 1995 17:13:51 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xsome of you are going to think this is cool; i think it's sick. i
Xdon't know why i did it. perhaps the heat got to me.
X
Xi just booted netbsd on my sparcstation from a floppy -- it's running
Xsingle user. it needed two floppies because the kernel was too large
X(i think i can change that.) the 1st floppy had a /boot and /netbsd;
Xthe 2nd had /sbin/init, /bin/sh, /dev/{console,tty,ttya}. but it came
Xup!
X
Xi had to boot "-as".. (and btw, i finally managed to reproduce a bug
Xsomeone else told me about before, where "-a" prints really strange
Xstuff.)
X
Xof course, there is no need for a GENERIC kernel on a floppy; it only
Xneeds a simple sun4c-only kernel.
END-of-75
echo x - 76
sed 's/^X//' >76 << 'END-of-76'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: ouch
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 31 May 1995 19:40:40 EDT."
X <9505312341.AA23854@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 31 May 1995 17:43:23 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xbut unfortunately we can't boot multiuser with sunos binaries because
Xof the "sloppy posix session" hack that larry put into
Xsunos. something goes wrong somewhere between init and your first
Xshell; i forget how it blows up.
X
Xtime for me to see how small a tiny kernel can go. at least sparc kernels
Xcompile in under 3 hours.
END-of-76
echo x - 77
sed 's/^X//' >77 << 'END-of-77'
XTo: Paul Kranenburg
XSubject: Re: ouch
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 01 Jun 1995 11:07:04 +0200."
X <9506010907.AA27767@cs.few.eur.nl>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Thu, 01 Jun 1995 05:14:18 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> I definitely think it's cool :-)
X
Xthanks.
X
X> (I remember trying this with a simple root-on-sd0 kernel; not really fancy)
X>
X> BTW. Does the floppy probe Ok after this? There was a bug in the probe
X> routine that would potentially hang the machine (continuous interrupts
X> from the flop) if the head happened to be at the inner tracks, causing a
X> recalibrate to take some time. I fixed this 2 weeks ago and my machine
X> seems to do fine. I know others have experienced such hangs too.
X
Xit works ok for me. i'm using the latest commited code. i've never
Xseen such a problem. i have on the other hand seen some really other
Xstupid things happen.
X
Xalso, i am astounded that it deals ok with the stupid mapping of
Xpartition id's on the floppy drive to densities. i don't respect that
Xdesign choice.
X
Xthe smallest i've managed to make a useful install kernel is around
X700K. that's pretty damn big.
END-of-77
echo x - 78
sed 's/^X//' >78 << 'END-of-78'
XTo: pk@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: curious
XDate: Wed, 14 Jun 1995 16:52:31 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xwith my kernel:
X
Xfloppy probes first, then esp
X
Xif there is a floppy in the drive, then everything works.
X
Xif there isn't a floppy in the drive, then the machine locks up while
Xprobing for scsi devices. i can't even get a trace, that's how solidly
Xit locks up.
END-of-78
echo x - 79
sed 's/^X//' >79 << 'END-of-79'
XTo: cgd@netbsd.org
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XSubject: two weeks
XDate: Tue, 20 Jun 1995 23:55:41 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
Xit's been somewhat over two weeks since i sent my last piece of mail to
Xcore. i thought i was going to get a reply.
X
Xis there any way in which i can be treated the same as every other person
Xwho contributes?
END-of-79
echo x - 80
sed 's/^X//' >80 << 'END-of-80'
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA01653; Wed, 21 Jun 95 14:20:09 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9506212020.AA01653@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu id aa01040;
X 21 Jun 95 16:19 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: two weeks
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 20 Jun 1995 23:55:41 MDT."
X <9506210555.AA27748@theos.com>
XDate: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 16:19:12 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
Xfor the last two weeks, that's the same response that just about
Xeverybody else has gotten. no, i'm not kidding. since the ball is
Xpretty much in my court on it (as core seems to be delegating to me),
Xyou've gotten to wait.
X
XI _told_ you that by not proposing any useful text, a couple of weeks
Xago, that that would slow things down considerably. since then, i've
Xbeen out of town (~5 days), working on Alpha stuff, and fighting with
Xthe machines that i brought back. I was planning to get to 'you'
Xsometime in the next couple of days.
X
X
Xcgd
END-of-80
echo x - 81
sed 's/^X//' >81 << 'END-of-81'
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA01973; Wed, 21 Jun 95 15:44:55 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9506212144.AA01973@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu id aa01164;
X 21 Jun 95 17:43 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XCc: cgd@netbsd.org
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: two weeks
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 20 Jun 1995 23:55:41 MDT."
X <9506210555.AA27748@theos.com>
XDate: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 17:43:09 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X> is there any way in which i can be treated the same as every other person
X> who contributes?
X
XBTW: what you've asked for is to be treated _significantly_
Xdifferently than the _vast_ majority of people who contribute.
X
XThe majority of people who contribute have no source tree access, and
Xsubmit software or diffs to people who do. Generally, if they can't
Xdo that easily, or think that it's not appropriate to go in the tree
Xyet, they put their software -- the source for their software -- up
Xfor FTP someplace, and let people look at it and play with it, etc.
X
X
XI just thought i'd make that clear. As i said before: i was planning
Xto address your mail in the next couple of days. That doesn't mean
Xreplying to it, that means getting something started (i.e. writing a
Xsmall piece of prose, circulating it in 'core', circulating it among
Xthe port maintainers, etc.) so that we will eventually be able to reply
Xto it.
X
X
Xcgd
END-of-81
echo x - 82
sed 's/^X//' >82 << 'END-of-82'
XReturn-Path: owner-current-users@NetBSD.ORG
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from pain.lcs.mit.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA10408; Thu, 22 Jun 95 19:14:00 MDT
XReceived: (from daemon@localhost) by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id BAA02122; Thu, 22 Jun 1995 01:43:24 -0400
XReceived: from lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu by pain.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA01640 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 1995 23:49:00 -0400
XMessage-Id: <199506220349.XAA01640@pain.lcs.mit.edu>
XReceived: from localhost by lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu id aa01539;
X 21 Jun 95 23:19 EDT
XTo: James Jegers
XCc: current-users@NetBSD.ORG
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: Future of NetBSD??
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 21 Jun 1995 21:26:08 CDT."
X <199506220226.VAA10847@miller.cs.uwm.edu>
XDate: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 23:19:43 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
XSender: owner-current-users@NetBSD.ORG
XPrecedence: list
XX-Loop: current-users@NetBSD.ORG
X
XThis is my take on this:
X
X
X> I know NetBSD's philosophy is to only give out the best written,
X> best operating things in it's system. I think we need to change
X> that philosophy.
X
XI strongly disagree with this. One of the biggest reasons why
X
XQuantity != Quality, and, for certain purposes, Quality is definitely
Xbetter in the long term.
X
X
X> I'm not saying anyone has done anythng wrong, I just think that the
X> CORE teams job should be to incorporate things others have written, and
X> not spend so much time writting new things. Fix bugs, incorporate
X> things people have written, and then work on things they think
X> should be fixed/redesigned.
X
XThe 'core' group does what a 'system architect' would do. That
Xincludes:
X (1) designing things,
X (2) setting directions of the code base,
X (3) possibly implementing things.
X
XThere are a _lot_ of people with access to the source tree who can't
Xor don't want to do (1) or (2), but want to fix bugs, maintain certain
Xprograms, etc. In general, they've been given source tree access
Xbecause:
X (1) they've asked for it, and
X (2) they've earned it (by maintaining packages independently,
X providing lots of bug fixes, etc.), and
X (3) they've demonstrated that they 'do things right.'
X
XYou'll notice that there're relatively few cases of "person did X,
Xit was then backed out by person Y because it was broken" (and most
Xof the instances of that you see are because it was only half done).
X
X
XPeople are welcome to integrate as much software as they like into the
Xsystem, and then present it to 'core' or the responsible party for the
Xchunks of code that they're changing, to have it put in the master
Xsource tree. However, if there aren't people designing new parts of
Xthe system (or redesigning existing parts), the entire system will
Xsuffer for it.
X
X
XIf you see that the i386 port has fewer features than you think it
Xshould, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. you'll note that not all ports have
Xthat problem; maintenance of a port is up to its maintainer.
X
XThere are a _lot_ of people and institutions using NetBSD, and many of
Xthem based their decisions on the fact that the code _does_ have the
Xquality it has, or the fact that we support as many systems as we do.
XThat's what we've always set out to do, and I, for one, plan to keep
Xdoing it.
X
X
XAs for why _I_, personally, spend so much time 'designing' things
Xrather than integrating i386 software:
X
XYou know, except for the i386 i use as a terminal (it's got 4M RAM and
Xonly 100M disk, so it's not really useful as a development system),
Xi've not had an i386-family machine in my office or home for over a
Xyear.
X
XFor the last year or so, i've _only_ had access to Alphas, and,
Xfrankly, i like them a heck of a lot more than i've ever liked the
Xx86. To start, they're faster... 8-)
X
XA lot of the work that i do is directly in support of the Alpha port.
X(You'll also note that for the last year, working on NetBSD/Alpha has
Xbeen my paying job, as well... 8-) That means completely rewriting
Xmonstrously broken code, all over the source tree. Very little code
Xis written with the goal of multi-architecture compatibility in mind,
Xand even less can be shared between 32-bit and 64-bit architectures.
XThat's one of the things that i'm trying to fix in the NetBSD source
Xtree.
X
XThe 'redesign' work that i've done for the alpha port has (amazingly)
Xbenefitted the i386 significantly. Some of those benefits you've
Xseen, some of them i'm still working on...
X
X
X
XMy point is:
X
XAn operating system without good, designed interfaces isn't worth the
Xpaper it's listed on, to researchers and develoepers, regardless of
Xthe number of features it has.
X
XIf you want 'advanced' features incorporated into NetBSD, then:
X (1) integrate them yourself, and make them available for
X comment, etc., and use the feedback you get to improve
X them.
X (2) support the developers. As far as i know, i'm the _only_
X NetBSD developer who's ever been paid to work on a
X port of NetBSD, and i'm (and you're 8-) lucky that my
X boss lets me work on things that appear irrelevant
X to the port... Very few of the developers have even
X received hardware to develop things on; it's
X impossible to test, develop, and maintain APM support,
X for instance, unless you have hardware that uses APM.
X
X
Xchris
END-of-82
echo x - 83
sed 's/^X//' >83 << 'END-of-83'
XReplied: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 21:51:17 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA03773; Wed, 21 Jun 95 21:49:52 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9506220349.AA03773@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu id aa01615;
X 21 Jun 95 23:48 EDT
XTo: deraadt@theos.com
XCc: cgd@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: did harvard folks get in touch?
XDate: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 23:48:15 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
Xthinking about writing the thing that i'm going to try get people to
Xcheck off on, a thought popped into my head:
X
Xdid the people at harvard ever get in touch with you? i pointed margo
Xat you a few weeks ago...
X
X
Xchris
END-of-83
echo x - 84
sed 's/^X//' >84 << 'END-of-84'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: did harvard folks get in touch?
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 21 Jun 1995 23:48:15 EDT."
X <9506220349.AA03773@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 21:51:17 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> did the people at harvard ever get in touch with you? i pointed margo
X> at you a few weeks ago...
X
Xyes, Aaron and i have been talking a fair bit. he just received his
Xv8 architecture book, and boy, has he got a lot of reading to do.
END-of-84
echo x - 85
sed 's/^X//' >85 << 'END-of-85'
XReplied: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 01:37:54 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou "
XReturn-Path: Chris_G_Demetriou@lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu
XReturn-Path:
XReceived: from lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu by theos.com (4.1/tdr1.0)
X id AA03953; Wed, 21 Jun 95 22:13:15 MDT
XMessage-Id: <9506220413.AA03953@theos.com>
XReceived: from localhost by lagavulin.pdl.cs.cmu.edu id aa01665;
X 22 Jun 95 0:12 EDT
XTo: Theo de Raadt
XPrecedence: special-delivery
XX-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved.
XX-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of
X the author.
XSubject: Re: did harvard folks get in touch?
XIn-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 21 Jun 1995 21:51:17 MDT."
X <9506220351.AA03785@theos.com>
XDate: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 00:12:51 -0400
XFrom: Chris G Demetriou
X
X> > did the people at harvard ever get in touch with you? i pointed margo
X> > at you a few weeks ago...
X>
X> yes, Aaron and i have been talking a fair bit. he just received his
X> v8 architecture book, and boy, has he got a lot of reading to do.
X
Xheh. "but the SPARC is such an easy architecture."
X
Xso, do you have a feel with how 'good' he is, and how much experience
Xhe has? margo said he was sort-of green...
X
X
X
Xchris
END-of-85
echo x - 86
sed 's/^X//' >86 << 'END-of-86'
XTo: Chris G Demetriou
XSubject: Re: did harvard folks get in touch?
XIn-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 22 Jun 1995 00:12:51 EDT."
X <9506220413.AA03953@theos.com>
XX-Copyright: (C) 1995 Theo de Raadt. Forwarding not permitted without prior permission.
XDate: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 01:37:54 -0600
XFrom: Theo de Raadt
X
X> heh. "but the SPARC is such an easy architecture."
X
Xwho said that?
X
X> so, do you have a feel with how 'good' he is, and how much experience
X> he has? margo said he was sort-of green...
X
Xhe might be "sort of". he sounds keen, and he is reading. yet he
Xdoesn't even have a machine installed yet... ugh. he did catch me on a
Xfew accidental contradictions when i was describing something, which
Xis healthy to see.
END-of-86
echo x - 87
sed 's/^X//' >87 << 'END-of-87'
XReplied: Sat, 24 Jun 1995 08:08:39 -0600
XReplied: "Chris G Demetriou