From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Aug 17 10:15:52 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5482F37B830 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id e7HHFdU08704; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:15:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:15:39 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Ariel Burbaickij Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: what do you allow in recent time to present to public or thegorystories of failed ... everything Message-ID: <20000817101539.B4854@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20000816183457.Y4854@fw.wintelcom.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i In-Reply-To: ; from Ariel.Burbaickij@mni.fh-giessen.de on Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 06:42:23PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Ariel Burbaickij [000817 09:40] wrote: > > > config is linking to the libc in your /usr/obj directory, I would > > remove the /usr/obj directory then recompile config. > > > > -Alfred > > > Find 3 differences between sample output some rows above and this one : > > bash-2.03# pwd > /usr/src/sys/i386/conf > bash-2.03# config ZHESTIANKAKER5 > /usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Shared object "libc.so.4" not found > bash-2.03# > Unable ? > > Same goes me.The difference is here,though.The later is made > after removing /usr/obj and why did I do it follows it somehow from > UPDATING ?No, it does not follows . I did it because you have advised it. > Now the question:What is so wrong on the idea to first try what you intend > to advise whether it works and then advise? > > Some common words are imho suitable here.You know after all operating > system is just automaton implemented in software and defined by all > possible variables and transitions.Now if it is not possible to transit > from one well-defined condition 3.4 to another( hopefully)well-defined > condition rigidly using transition function(UPGRADING)then there are > just 2 explanations : 1)transition function is poorly defined > 2)the condition to tranfer to is impossible in both cases > blmae is with implementors (i.e. you .you as those who name themselves > proudly core development team .Reasons to be proud are vanishing.) I totally forgot that I had committed to not answering any more of your questions. The reason is that after the first _almost_ comprehendable email which leaves me with hope of being able to help the exchange deteriorates into something not of this earth. That and you seem incapable of using whitespace and punctuation in a way that allows me to read your email without developing a sever migraine. I read the above paragraphs about 3 times before finally understanding what you're babbling on about. Roughly translated to english means: Alfred, I'm a complete and utter dumbass, I broke my FreeBSD system, the help which I ought to be thankful for (even though it didn't work) wasn't helpful. Howwever, instead of just saying that, I'm going to rant and flame you because you're unable to break your own FreeBSD installation in the spectacularly stupid way that I have, therefore you're unable to provide a the solution that I need and are in need of some sarcastic half-assed attack on your technical ability. Thanks for wasting 30 minutes of my life, -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message