Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 14:55:01 +0100 From: Mohammad Noureldin <mohammad@thelightbird.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call to delay EOL of 11.x -> Re: OS to replace FreeBSD Message-ID: <CAAQ96DwsjL5ORUhYkb6Q573WtP20EYBpGBGwhjPP_rRhYS_47g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20210320093304.00001e37@seibercom.net> References: <NGCSlp5NzhdwJNGCUlpzqu@videotron.ca> <5743CB5D-338C-4609-8E89-396440926CEC@videotron.ca> <20210319110001.00000bf8@seibercom.net> <4602cbad-bf26-18d1-83e6-cba9627787d8@johnea.net> <90FEC704-1764-43E7-BEFA-C9481CF14714@kreme.com> <CAAQ96DyS5HOxkE77eoCNPo6O4mEWahhg-PWY=y8M_vdU_kpuMQ@mail.gmail.com> <20210320083808.00000cb1@seibercom.net> <CAAQ96DwosgKxnbU=itPRWfmAjhzHcoSbRonq8_B24=xAo9MrxA@mail.gmail.com> <20210320093304.00001e37@seibercom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Jerry, I do agree with others not to talk about the same problem on more than one thread. This is not helping you or anyone else. As for your reply, I was not talking about installing FreeBSD directly, I was talking about one of the proposed ways to test, by installing FreeBSD in a VM to see if you would get the same issues. IIUC, this can help more in understanding and solving the problem. On Sat, Mar 20, 2021, 14:33 Jerry <jerry@seibercom.net> wrote: > On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:45:13 +0100, Mohammad Noureldin stated: > >Hi Jerry, > > > >On Sat, Mar 20, 2021, 13:38 Jerry <jerry@seibercom.net> wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 12:30:15 +0100, Mohammad Noureldin stated: > >> >Hi, > >> > > >> >On Sat, Mar 20, 2021, 10:00 @lbutlr <kremels@kreme.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On 19 Mar 2021, at 10:10, freebsd@johnea.net wrote: > >> >> > To anyone who has read the bug report, this is clearly a > >> >> > serious > >> >> regression issue on certain USB (probably 3) host controller > >> >> hardware. > >> >> > >> >> I've read the bug report and all the replies and it is clearly a > >> >> flaw in the controller. It is providing an invalid ID. > >> >> > >> > > >> >If that's the case, I am curious how other Unix-Like Operating > >> >Systems manage to work on the same HW ? > >> > >> There are a number of possibilities. > >> > >> 1) They have better programmers that can handle abnormalities. > >> > >> 2) They realize that there are always going to be flaws in software > >> and hardware and are smart enough to work around it. > >> > >> This is of course assuming that the actual problem is a defective > >> controller that every other OS can handle correctly. If, and this is > >> assuming that is correct, then why doesn't FreeBSD just code what the > >> defective controller is allegedly sending and accept it? > >> > >> The simple fact the the code worked in versions prior to 12.x makes > >> this excuse that the controlled is defective highly suspect. > >> > > > >Hi Jerry, > > > >I do understand your frustrations, but if you allow me, it is not a > >reason to attack the FreeBSD community and it's developers. Let's > >please focus on facts and possible solutions. > > > >As stated in this thread (and another one), did you have time to try > >any of the proposed tests ? > > > >Looking forward to your reply > > I CANNOT install it, so I am unsure of how to build a custom kernel. > Then, assuming I could build a custom kernel, I would not be able to > use the "freebsd update" utility. So, to put it in the vernacular, > "I am fucked if I do, and fucked if I don't". Not a great choice of > options. I am investigating it though. I got some help from a friend on > the Microsoft forum who told me he was almost positive I could install > Windows 10 PRO, then Hyper V and run FreeBSD 12.x or 13.x from there. > He is polling other users to see if they have had success with the same > equipment I process. The one very apparent advantage is that I would be > able to take advantage of Intel's Optane Memory and Storage. As far as > I can tell, FreeBSD does not support that architecture. > > In computing, the robustness principle is a design guideline for software: > > Be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from > others (often reworded as "Be conservative in what you send, be liberal > in what you accept"). The principle is also known as Postel's law, > after Jon Postel, who wrote in an early specification of TCP: > > TCP implementations should follow a general principle of robustness: be > conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others. > In other words, programs that send messages to other machines (or to > other programs on the same machine) should conform completely to the > specifications, but programs that receive messages should accept > non-conformant input as long as the meaning is clear. > > Among programmers, to produce compatible functions, the principle is > also known in the form be contravariant in the input type and covariant > in the output type. > > While this is not a TCP issue directly, the same general principal is > still relevant. > > -- > Jerry > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAAQ96DwsjL5ORUhYkb6Q573WtP20EYBpGBGwhjPP_rRhYS_47g>