8.x grudges

[Mikhail T.]

07.07.2010 16:34, Randi Harper ???????(??):
>
>> Attached is the kernel config-file (i386), that worked fine under 7.x. The
>> kernel-compile will break (some *freebsd7* structs undefined), without the
>> COMPAT_FREEBSD7 option. Try it for yourself...
>>      
> Don't use a kernel config from 7. We've already told you this.
>    
Your "telling" me this is just as valid as warning me against using 
computer-cases of a particular color. It is a silly requirement. My 
expecting things, that worked for 7, to work in 8 is reasonable. There 
may be (documented!) exceptions, but it ought to "just work".
>> Yes, your way is fine. But so is mine. It is perfectly reasonable to expect
>> my method to work just as well -- the 7->8 is not revolutionary, but simply
>> the next step. I read the "UPDATING" file and, though annoyed a little, took
>> care of things mentioned in there... The remaining things are enumerated
>> here...
>>      
> Your way clearly isn't fine, as it doesn't work.
>    
That's an obviously flawed argument -- this line of thinking can be used 
against ANY ONE reporting ANY BUG -- if one has a problem, then one's 
way of doing things "clearly isn't fine".
>
> These changes aren't gratuitous. Did you read the commit messages
> behind each of the changes? I'm guessing that you haven't.
>    
No, and I'm not going to. A commercial OS would've been the laughing 
stock, if one hand to change C: to 1: between releases, for example...
>>
>> Again: this particular change seems gratuitous.
>>      
> It's not. You didn't bother researching before complaining.
I bothered to type up my list. Presumably, problem-reports are welcome. 
I've been a Unix-user since 1990, a FreeBSD user since 1993 (or 94?), 
and a project-member for a decade. If *I* have a problem, then newer 
users certainly will too. And, guess what, they'll simply go with 
something, that does not give as much grief...
> To put it in simple terms, there were changes made to geom, and the way that
> sysinstall writes out dedicated disks wasn't compatible. Search the
> mailing list archives.
>    
If this is a known problem, it is even more of an outrage, that some 
shim was not introduced to keep the users from hitting this particular bump.
>
> The modification should be necessary.
Why? Why should a netboot act differently from a local boot from CD?
> Just because you don't want to
> make the modification doesn't mean it was made that way by accident.
>    
No, I never claimed this to have been an accident...
> That variable can be set to any number of things. We don't advertise
> the iso image just working out of the box for pxe booting.
You don't. But there is very little, that needs to be added there for it 
to "just work" over both netboot and local CD, and you should do it, 
instead of arguing with me here... No, I don't know, what it is exactly, 
but I'm quite certain, it can't be very much.
> In fact, the article about PXE booting on the official freebsd website says
> nothing about using the ISO. You just found some article that said it
> was possible (and it is) and complained because you didn't like the
> process?
>    
Yes, exactly. I didn't like process -- it is needlessly complicated. The 
same CD-image, /should/ also be usable "out of the box" for netbooting.
>
> Funny. It works just fine in 8.0 on my Athlon. Have you tried updating
> the port?
Yes, I have -- and I said so in my very first e-mail on this subject. 
For someone, who expects people to "research mailing lists", you do a 
terrible job of following a one-day-old thread...
> Also, even if it didn't work, this is an issue you should
> take up with the author of the port.
Tom -- the maintainer -- is still in CC...
>
> > From the man page:
>
>       The amdtemp driver provides support for the on-die digital thermal sensor
>       present in AMD K8, K10 and K11 processors.
>    
I know nothing about the driver. But a utility I regularly used stopped 
working after upgrade, so I added that to my list of upgrade-related 
grudges.

    -mi