Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:14:07 -0400 From: Aryeh Friedman <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> To: FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: OS to replace FreeBSD Message-ID: <CAGBxaXm8VEGQH=QABJe1o83wDe_NP_U6KgprxgzcyXZdHqYm4g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20210321120633.00004136@seibercom.net> References: <20210320132339.00004d9a@seibercom.net> <38EDD406-3EC4-4F71-B990-DDD1E753D091@kreme.com> <20210321113403.00004056@seibercom.net> <CAGBxaXmV8Z7G=NCw3AX%2Brhn3QNjMvNAqKPVNOYEnTFMZEq9Pgg@mail.gmail.com> <20210321120633.00004136@seibercom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 12:07 PM Jerry <jerry@seibercom.net> wrote: > >Why should they?!?!? > > > >The reasons for "why should they" are: > >1. There is an almost infinite number of combinations of hardware that > >one can find out there and most of them are like the person you are > >replying to edge cases that effect very few people (as witnessed by > >you can't find anyone with a close enough system that is willing to > >actually do the work to test any fixes on... so this leaves two > >options: a) you stop complaining and help actually fix the bug, b) you > >switch OS's.... either way stop publically whining about stuff you > >refuse to help with in an way and if you switch OS's this is the wrong > >forum to do it in -- in short STFU) > > > >2. They *DO* list hardware that is *KNOWN* to be 100% compatible and > >working with the base system if you are not using one of the listed > >components then you are venturing into unknown territory and any > >problems are on you to report and or help fix... if you decide to go > >this route then you have no one except yourself to blame when you run > >into "some assembly required" situations and likely you are one the > >few people that can help fix it... yet you refuse to... again STFU > > I have no problem with them listing every system they know to be 100% > companionable. However, logistically, I believe the to be a > impractical. I think the possibility of them actually testing every > possible controller, et cetera under every conceivable environment to be > absurd. All they really need to do is compile a list of known units with > incompatibility issues, post them and then keep them updated. > Again why should they if the issue is an open and actively being investigated bug report. The purpose of such a list is for things the have decided not to support and any device that claims support for function X but does not quite meet the standard (as implemented in the kernel) is then by definition a bug that needs to be looked into. The bug you are complaining about *IS* being actively looked into and thus does not belong on the "we don't support list". So once again you are wasting your time and everyone else's time by barking up a tree that doesn't exist (and should not exist). So either switch to another OS or help solve the issue your complaining about. Neither option is really the territory of -questions@ so once again STFU. -- Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer, http://www.PetiteCloud.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGBxaXm8VEGQH=QABJe1o83wDe_NP_U6KgprxgzcyXZdHqYm4g>