[LUAU] s/hosef.ics.hawaii.edu/mirrors.hosef.org/g
Jim Thompson
jim at netgate.com
Wed Dec 20 06:14:07 PST 2006
On Dec 20, 2006, at 12:53 AM, Jimen Ching wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Jim Thompson wrote:
>> Attempting to define LUAU is like trying to hold water in your fist.
>
> When you make the statement "LUAU is HOSEF", you're attempting to
> define LUAU. I must then ask, why are you attempting to do
> something that seems impossible?
>
>>> I've cared about the direction of the LUAU mailing list for a
>>> long time. I'm sure the archives will show that I've voiced my
>>> opinions on the matter on many occasions. If that proves me to
>>> be childish and petty, then so be it.
>>
>> And what action(s) have you taken?
>
> 'Voice my opinion' as mentioned in the qouted text.
>
>> If you review the history carefully, the "former managers" had
>> checked out.
>
> May I ask what the point of this statement?
That LUAU had, essentially, died before the current folks revived it.
> There are managers now, right? So why bring up former managers?
> Are you trying to say something about the current managers?
>
>> LUAU is also essentially the same people who are involved with HOSEF.
>
> This is one of the issues I have. Not everyone in LUAU is involved
> with HOSEF. Thus, saying LUAU is HOSEF isn't fair to these people.
Not everyone in HOSEF is involved with LUAU, either. Still LUAU =
HOSEF = LUAU = HOSEF.
HOSEF was formed on the LUAU list. Have you forgotten?
http://lists.hosef.org/pipermail/luau/2002-October/010919.html
http://lists.hosef.org/pipermail/luau/2002-October/010989.html
(Have you forgotten that you once put Warren in your killfile?)
LUAU is supported and maintained by HOSEF. Did you not know?
HOSEF is a 503(c) (non profit) corporation in part so UH can host the
machine and provide the bandwidth. Did you know?
Or are you worried that LUAU will loose its "geek culture"? http://
lists.hosef.org/pipermail/luau/2002-September/010388.html
>> Yes, you can attend the next HOSEF board meeting. Its tomorrow
>> night.
>
> Looks like I missed the meeting.
We looked for you.
> I think I only need to meet with Scott, as the issue I have is
> really between me and Scott and not the entire HOSEF board.
What is your issue, exactly?
> The HOSEF board didn't make any statements. Scott did.
I am also on the board, as is Julian Yap and Ron Fox. (There is
another person named Patrick, but he's been silent and hasn't shown
up to a HOSEF board meeting in a while.)
>> Do you want to suggest an agenda item, or were you coming to listen?
>
> I have no issues with HOSEF or with its board members. I'm mainly
> concerned about the LUAU mailing list and the hardware supporting it.
>
>> You are free to 'fork' the list, and always have been.
>> You are free to copy the archives of the list, and always have been
>> You are free to post messages to the LUAU list and tell the
>> assembled there that you have a different list (you can even name
>> it LUAU, though its obviously not going to be
>> <luau at lists.hosef.org>. Those you invite are free to join in.
>
> What are you trying to say with these suggestions? You want me to
> fork the list? I certainly don't need you to tell me what I'm free
> or not free to do. So please, come out and say what you really mean.
I am saying you are free to fork the list, and always have been. I
am (expressly) not encouraging you to do so.
>> You have always been free to do these things, but there is a
>> reason you have not.
>>
>> You may wish to explore same.
>
> So I have a reason for not forking the list? Ok, now I'm curious.
> Please enlighten me.
Only you know why you persist in arguing the point, rather than
starting your own version of the list.
>>> I know when I joined LUAU, I joined LUAU, not HOSEF.
>>
>> You limit yourself unnecessarily. Why?
>
> Because I don't see it as a limitation. I see it as freedom to
> choose what I want to involve myself with.
When you join a company, as an employee, and that company acquires a
different company, do you quit your job?
When your friend/spouse/lover acquires an acquaintance whom you can't
stand, do you quit them?
>>>> Interesting. Your volunteer time to help Julian and Vince
>>>> administrate LUAU is always welcome. Your time to install the
>>>> soon-to-be donated hard drives would be appreciated. No
>>>> individual has the ability to dump LUAU.
>>
>> Did Scott say anything about HOSEF? No. He said, "Your
>> volunteer time to help Julian and Vince administrate LUAU is
>> always welcome. " You responded with a red herring. Why?
>
> Sorry. My comment was specifically responding to the hard drive
> thread, not to the "help Julin and Vince" part. My bad for not
> editing my qoute better. Actually, I did kind of mention the hard
> drive thread. You just cut my paragraph apart, so it make me sound
> like I said something I didn't. Still, I should've edited my qoute
> better.
You responded with a red herring. Why?
>
>>> If I understand the hard drive thread, that's about mirroring of
>>> distributions. I do not believe LUAU as a mailing list will be
>>> significantly impacted by this. But if it is, I'm willing to
>>> purchase the necessary equipment to make it independent.
>>
>> Does the local mirroring of distributions not help those who are
>> interested in the topics appropriate for LUAU?
>
> It is appropriate. Did I say otherwise? Matter of fact, any HOSEF
> related topic is appropriate for LUAU.
So HOSEF is LUAU? :-)
or have you backed off from your position here: http://
lists.hosef.org/pipermail/luau/2002-September/010356.html
<quoting>
Perhaps specialized topics like linux for schools does not belong in a
general purpose mailing list like Luau. I believe the idea of
censorship
came up in the past and was shot down. Of course, videl is your server
and no one can force you to host a list you don't like.
</quoting>
>>> I've been a member of LUAU long before HOSEF.
>> This doesn't mean you are being civil or respectful.
>
> Ugh, ok. You're misqouting me, again. Matter of fact, I was
> trying to say I wasn't being civil or respectful at all. That's
> what the rest of the paragraph was trying to say. But you cut it
> apart. And in doing so, changed the meaning.
>
>>> And now I'm being told that since I don't provide the time and
>>> money to maintain it, I don't have a say in the direction of LUAU.
>> You've been told no such thing, of course.
>
> It's my interpretation of what was said. Granted, I may have
> misinterpreted the comments. I hope that's what happened...
I find it likely that you have misinterpreted many things. I also
find it likely that you have been misinterpreted.
>
>> No "organization" posts here. We are all individuals, and I doubt
>> that many, indeed if any of us think we represent an organization
>> when we post here.
>
> I don't know if you know this. But organizations don't make posts.
Is this not what I said?
> The officers of the organizations make the posts.
Others, who are not officers, also post.
> When such an officer makes a post, he or she needs to say whether
> they are speaking for the organization or for themselves. When no
> such disclaimer is made, one has to assume. Which leads to
> misunderstandings. I'm sure that's what has happened here...
I am certain you will hear me state that I am speaking for HOSEF when
I do.
I am certain you will hear other board members behave in a largely
similar fashion.
I am certain that Scott (who is not a board member) will behave in a
largely similar fashion.
No officer "needs" to state that they are speaking on behalf of the
organization, unless they are.
Scott did not say "We", he said "I".
Your apparent confusion is groundless.
Many people appear to mistake "Scott Belford" for "HOSEF", are you
one of them?
In reviewing parts of the archive, I also see that you are confused
about the terms of the GPL.
http://lists.hosef.org/pipermail/luau/2003-October/014441.html
Point in fact, if you distribute binaries of **unmodified** code
covered by the GPL, then you *must* either distribute the source code
*with* the binaries, or make a written offer,
such that **anyone** can get them for the cost of distribution.
Richard Stallman will be here in January (at PFOSSCON), you can ask
him if you don't believe me.
You are also dead wrong about how "patents are (usually) used".
Patents are usually used to cross-license. You loose a trademark by
not defending its dilution, and copyright doesn't "fall somewhere in
the middle".
The FSF only pursues GPL violators where they hold (have been
assigned) the copyright.
Your explanation here: http://lists.hosef.org/pipermail/luau/2003-
October/014439.html is false. gdb can place breakpoints at any
address (subject to hardware constraints.)
See below. Note how the breakpoint was placed at the start of the
(first) statement on that line (address 0x400487).
This statement (redundantly, but thats what was in the original code)
sets the counter. This (of course) only happens once. The next
instruction is a jump. Note that
I compiled with just "gcc -g". If you set "-O" then the generated
code gets shorter (for instance, the redundant clear of the stack
variable 'x' is eliminated, as well as the initial jmp.)
If you set "-O2", the generated instruction stream gets shorter
still, at "-O3" the loop is unrolled (and eliminated), as well as the
updates to 'x' (in fact, the stack variable 'x' doesn't actually
exist at -O3)
So, in fact, there are many reasons 'why' the behavior can happen.
I could continue to pick-apart your posting history (and its
inaccuracies), but I won't.
Its also interesting to see how Scott has changed his tune over the
years: http://lists.hosef.org/pipermail/luau/2003-October/014452.html
Jim
jim at www2:~$ gdb ./a.out
GNU gdb 6.4.90-debian
Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and
you are
welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain
conditions.
Type "show copying" to see the conditions.
There is absolutely no warranty for GDB. Type "show warranty" for
details.
This GDB was configured as "x86_64-linux-gnu"...Using host
libthread_db library "/lib/libthread_db.so.1".
(gdb) list
1 #include <stdio.h>
2
3 int
4 main()
5 {
6 int x = 0;
7 for (x = 0; x < 10; x++)
8 {
9 printf("the value of x is %d\n", x);
10 }
(gdb) break 7
Breakpoint 1 at 0x400487: file t2.c, line 7.
(gdb) disass main
Dump of assembler code for function main:
0x0000000000400478 <main+0>: push %rbp
0x0000000000400479 <main+1>: mov %rsp,%rbp
0x000000000040047c <main+4>: sub $0x10,%rsp
0x0000000000400480 <main+8>: movl $0x0,0xfffffffffffffffc(%rbp)
0x0000000000400487 <main+15>: movl $0x0,0xfffffffffffffffc(%rbp)
0x000000000040048e <main+22>: jmp 0x4004a6 <main+46>
0x0000000000400490 <main+24>: mov 0xfffffffffffffffc(%rbp),%esi
0x0000000000400493 <main+27>: mov $0x4005ac,%edi
0x0000000000400498 <main+32>: mov $0x0,%eax
0x000000000040049d <main+37>: callq 0x4003b0 <printf at plt>
0x00000000004004a2 <main+42>: addl $0x1,0xfffffffffffffffc(%rbp)
0x00000000004004a6 <main+46>: cmpl $0x9,0xfffffffffffffffc(%rbp)
0x00000000004004aa <main+50>: jle 0x400490 <main+24>
0x00000000004004ac <main+52>: mov $0x0,%eax
0x00000000004004b1 <main+57>: leaveq
0x00000000004004b2 <main+58>: retq
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) del 1
(gdb) break *0x40049d
Breakpoint 2 at 0x40049d: file t2.c, line 9.
(gdb) run
Starting program: /home/jim/a.out
Breakpoint 2, 0x000000000040049d in main () at t2.c:9
9 printf("the value of x is %d\n", x);
(gdb) cont 9
Will ignore next 8 crossings of breakpoint 2. Continuing.
the value of x is 0
the value of x is 1
the value of x is 2
the value of x is 3
the value of x is 4
the value of x is 5
the value of x is 6
the value of x is 7
the value of x is 8
Breakpoint 2, 0x000000000040049d in main () at t2.c:9
9 printf("the value of x is %d\n", x);
(gdb) cont
Continuing.
the value of x is 9
Program exited normally.
(gdb) quit
More information about the LUAU
mailing list