-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Datum: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 13:48:34 +0200
Von: "Markus Rechberger" <[email protected]>
An: "Uwe Bugla" <[email protected]>
CC: "hermann pitton" <[email protected]>, [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Betreff: Re: [linux-dvb] Re: Critical points about kernel 2.6.21 and
pseudo-authorities
> On 4/30/07, Uwe Bugla <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> > Datum: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 02:58:33 +0200
> > Von: hermann pitton <[email protected]>
> > An: Uwe Bugla <[email protected]>
> > CC: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>, [email protected],
> > [email protected], [email protected],
> > [email protected]
> > Betreff: Re: [linux-dvb] Re: Critical points about kernel 2.6.21
> > and pseudo-authorities
> >
> > > Am Montag, den 30.04.2007, 01:00 +0200 schrieb Uwe Bugla:
> > > > -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> > > > Datum: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 14:19:22 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > Von: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
> > > > An: Uwe Bugla <[email protected]>
> > > > CC: [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected],
> > > [email protected], [email protected]
> > > > Betreff: Re: Critical points about kernel 2.6.21 and
> pseudo-authorities
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 29 Apr 2007, Uwe Bugla wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been trying diff and other tools in various variants
> (except
> > > > > > git-bisect that I cannot handle because I do not understand the
> > > practice
> > > > > > of it).
> > > > >
> > > > > git bisect is _really_ simple if you already have a git tree
> anyway.
> > > And
> > > > > even if you don't, getting one isn't really hard either. Just do
> > > > >
> > > > > git clone
> > > > >
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git
> > > linux-2.6
> > > > >
> > > > > and you have a tree (it will take a little while - it's going to
> > > dowload
> > > > > about 170MB or so of stuff, so the initial clone is going to be a
> bit
> > > > > painful unless you have a fast internet connection).
> > > > >
> > > > > Once you have the git tree, assuming that 2.6.21-rc7 worked for
> you,
> > > it's
> > > > > really as easy as just saying
> > > > >
> > > > > git bisect start
> > > > > git bisect good v2.6.21-rc7
> > > > > git bisect bad v2.6.21
> > > > >
> > > > > and git will think for a short while (most of the time is going to
> be
> > > > > checking out the new tree) and give you a tree to test.
> > > > >
> > > > > Just build, boot, and test that tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > If it was fine, do
> > > > >
> > > > > git bisect good
> > > > >
> > > > > and git will pick a new tree to test. And if it wasn't, instead
> just
> > > do
> > > > > "git bisect bad", and git will pick _another_ version to test. Do
> this
> > > a
> > > > > few times, and git will tell you which commit introduced them.
> > > > >
> > > > > There were just 125 commits in between 2.6.21-rc7 and the final
> one,
> > > so it
> > > > > should be quite quick - bisection basically does a binary search,
> so
> > > doing
> > > > > seven reboots should have you with the result.
> > > > >
> > > > > The fact that it already works in 2.6.21-git2 obviously means that
> _I_
> > > end
> > > > > up being less interested, but the -stable tree people would love
> to
> > > hear
> > > > > what broke!
> > > >
> > > > Hi again Linus,
> > > > my deep thanks for your excellent explication of git-bisect.
> > > > But I unfortunately owe a 100Kbit flatrate, and so downloading some
> 170
> > > MB git tree will need the time amount of one entire night (11.5 kb /s
> if I
> > > am lucky - no more).
> > > > Just to take up a different approach:
> > > >
> > > > The difference between 2.6.21-rc7 and 2.6.21 official does not play
> any
> > > role at all.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand I found out that:
> > > > 2.6.21-rc7 made my AMD K7 router work fine
> > > > 2.6.21 official hung my AMD K7 router up
> > > > 2.6.21-git1 hung my AMD K7 router up
> > > > 2.6.21-git2 made my AMD K7 router work.
> > > >
> > > > In so far the diff between 2.6.21-git1 and 2.6.21-git2 obviously
> solves
> > > the problem.
> > > > Or am I saying something wrong as far as logical terms are
> concerned?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I like small and effective kernels instead of blown up RAM
> waste.
> > > > > > This is no Windoze, man, this is Linux!
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes. But if you cannot be polite and *RESPECTFUL*, you won't get
> > > anywhere
> > > > > at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is Linux, not Windows. But that also means that those
> developers
> > > that
> > > > > you denigrate aren't getting paid by you, and if you don't show
> them
> > > > > respect, they'll totally ignore you.
> > > > >
> > > > > Linus
> > > >
> > > > Now this is the old problem about it all: the hypocricy factor, the
> > > utmost small, if not to say pre-pubertarian character plus some other
> > obviously
> > > counter-productive character traits in those so-called "maintainers"
> who
> > > behave like kids, but not like grown-ups at all!
> > > > Not only you, but also Andrew perfectly and willingly step into the
> > > hypocritic trap and do not even feel that they are trapped!
> > > >
> > > > For the majority of all cases of the so-called "maintainer
> personnel" at
> > > linuxtv.org the statement of some missing "politeness" or some missing
> > > "respect" is nothing but an utmost dumb, kiddish, human mediocre and
> > utmost
> > > stupid and utmost hypocritic excuse for bare naked incompatibility,
> > dumbness,
> > > wrong solidarity, kiddishness and technical incompetence.
> > > >
> > > > They are building up pseudo-authorities to hide their lack of
> > > competence, no matter if their lack of competence funds on technical
> or
> > human lacks.
> > > > And at least the Brazilian Mauro Carvalho Chehab does go even so far
> to
> > > soap in Andrew Morton's face with this enourmous threat of
> incompetence,
> > > kiddishness, incompatibility, hypocricy, lies, stigmatisations,
> > stubbornness,
> > > lack of experience, pre-pubertarian behaviour, fascistoid opinion
> > > dictatorship as part of a deep immature anti-democratic and
> reactionary
> > personality
> > > structure.
> > > >
> > > > Would you call Mauro Carvalho Chehab a maintainer!
> > > > I can certify you that I cannot, even if I try. And I want him to be
> > > substituted as quick as possible as he is the biggest mismatch of
> > gatekeeper
> > > one can ever imagine.
> > > >
> > > > And it is not only me personally perceiving this that there are
> people
> > > missing who can go upright and offer sophisticated and good work.
> > > > Plus a real sophisticated discussion behaviour, in technical and in
> > > human terms.
> > > > Going upright is thus far away from the behaviour NOT to be able to
> > > tolerate any criticism at all.
> > > >
> > > > Solution: This whole new quite young linuxtv.org team is missing a
> real
> > > grown up and experienced team leader. Not only that is definitely too
> much
> > > for Mauro Carvalho Chehab. That is the pain - the consistence of the
> whole
> > > group is the pain, that's all. Too young, too many lacks of human
> skills,
> > > and missing an appropriate team leader.............
> > > >
> > > > So, if I show respect or not, or if I show politeness or not will
> never
> > > change the whole structural situation at all, as great parts of the
> whole
> > > team is a disease:
> > > > 1. By Chehab being the team leader the whole fish stinks from the
> head
> > > startup.
> > > > Solution: Substitution of Mauro Carvalho Chehab as quick as possible
> -
> > > even quicker than a storm!
> > > > 2. By Krufky being one part of it, doing good work, but executing
> wrong
> > > solidarities by his bowing behaviour towards pseudo-authorities
> although
> > he
> > > knows better at least technically this is a question of wrong or right
> > > leadership, nothing else
> > > > 3. By Abraham offering us great ranting aims that never are being
> put
> > > into practice out of certified missing human skills and missing
> technical
> > > knowledge (the four completely unusable 2.6 kernels were never
> apologized
> > by
> > > himself) urgent substitution is utmost necessary.
> > > >
> > > > CLEARER: If anyone of the people knowing the deeper context claims
> those
> > > "gatekeeper methods" to be a consequence of missing "respect" or
> missing
> > > "politeness" then those people are either strictly dumb and
> superficial,
> > or
> > > they owe a gesture that I would call a "Well, I know, but I do not
> want to
> > > see what's going on"-disease, nothing else.
> > > >
> > > > Another term to describe the latter would be "bureaucratic lamb head
> > > behaviour".
> > > >
> > > > See, Linus, if for instance Andrew Morton mails me some statement
> from
> > > that Chehab going: "Again, do not take the patches from Uwe - he is
> always
> > > regarding things through his personal prisma, and the rest he simply
> does
> > > not perceive at all"
> > > >
> > > > then this is nothing but a gesture full of lies (somehow typical for
> > > this Brazilian fascistoid opinion block head dictator), but it simply
> > shows
> > > that the linuxtv.org teamleader is a horrible mismatch, nothing else!
> > > >
> > > > His mediocrity and dumbness simply defines through the fact that he
> is
> > > using stigmatizations very soon in a so-called "discussion" because he
> > > misses
> > > > a. human skills
> > > > b. technical proven arguments and theses
> > > > c. enough experience, human or technical one.
> > > >
> > > > And the biggest threat and shame is the proven fact that Andrew
> Morton
> > > does obey to such a stupid reactionary idiot and let his face soap in
> by
> > > this dirty Brazilian hypocrite instead of giving contributions at
> least a
> > > chance through his mm-tree.
> > > >
> > > > So there are exactly two solutions:
> > > > 1. Andrew Morton should not obey to Chehab anymore and be real open
> > > > 2. Chehab and Abraham should be substituted as quick as possible
> without
> > > any hesitation in no way!!!!
> > > >
> > > > The one that got to be fired with the most urgent priority is called
> > > Mauro Carvalho Chehab. This is no maintainer, this is no gatekeeper,
> but
> > this
> > > is nothing but a real personified ape or disease.
> > > >
> > > > And the argument whether those people are paid for their work or not
> is
> > > exactly as important as if a sack of rice falls down somewhere in
> > > capitalist China or not.....
> > > > OBSOLETE!!!
> > > >
> > > > Yours sincerely
> > > > Uwe
> > > >
> > >
> > > If eventually somebody thinks this kind of stuff could be helpful,
> > > please say so and give us some pointers.
> > >
> > > Hermann
> > >
> > Hi Hermann,
> >
> > now if you are searching for helpful stuff I can make public a ten
> Emails
> > ping pong
> > betwwen stupid Chehab and me about my almost excellent dst-deselection
> patch
> > contributions.
> >
> > In this ten Emails you will yourself see the intellectual and technical
> > proof in how far Mr. Chehab is acting with nothing else but:
> >
> > a. Lies
> > b. Unproven thesis
> > c. Stigmatizations
> >
> > and so on.
> >
> > THIS MAN HAS NO IDEA, BUT HE HAS THE POWER!
> >
> > That's it what I cannot live with!
> > I swear I never stumbled over such an utomst stubborn, stupid and
> horrible
> > idiot in my whole year lasting Linux experience, and I thought I could
> not
> > trust my eyes when I saw what incredible crap work was pushed into
> mainline
> > by the signature of this
> > incredible and horrible team chief from Brazil.
> >
> > If you want to see the Emails, just ask me and I will forward them with
> a
> > couple of CCs. They will show the truth about the real consistence of
> this
> > "maintainer leader".
> >
>
> Uwe,
>
> which patches do you refer to?
> Can you submit a list of your patches which got no attention (I'm only
> interested in the patches, not in discussions you had)
>
> Markus
Hi Markus,
a thousands of thanks for your friendly response - very nice! What a
pleasure!
I do not send in the two patches for one more time. I have sent them in so
often!
If you take a closer look at the mailing list you will easily find them.
One is a docu fix, and the other one, causing so much trouble out of nothing
but Chehab's stubbornness and incompetence, is the one that makes the two
DST modules
deselectable (i. e. DST itself for TwinHan DST and clones plus DST_CA for
TwinHan cards with CA slot and Pinnacle PCTV SAT cards with CI extension for
example).
Chehab told me some crap about unresolved symbols which never existed as
this second patch just runs fine.
