On 2005 Mar 19, at 2:40 PM, Scott Long wrote:
>>> I'm saying that resources are out
>>> there that will allow OpenBSD users to manage their RAID arrays
>>> RIGHT NOW. No, they don't meet the goals of open source, but they
>>> meet the goals of getting the job done.
>>
>> No, they don't.
>> You've already admitted that Adaptec firmware is full of bugs. Why
>> shouldn't we assume that the binary-only crap you're trying to push
>> on us isn't full of the same?
>
> Oh bullshit. I didn't say anything like that. Here's a shocker....
> OpenBSD has bugs! And so does FreeBSD! And so does the Space Shuttle
> guidance system. Next time you try to put word in my mouth, try a
> little harder at it. Jackass.
You're suggesting that we use something with bugs...and that we're
prevented fromm even trying to fix. And you have the nerve to claim
that this somehow ``gets the job done.'' At least you don't work for
the auto industry--when people like you have pulled this kind of crap
in the past, lots of innocents have died.
You mention the Shuttle. Do you really think that NASA would consider
for a moment purchasing from somebody who refused to provide
interoperability documentation? Somebody who insisted that they install
an untestable, known-buggy black box in a critical part of the Shuttle?
No?
So...why should our standards be any lower?
If we were to adopt your suggestion for managing Adaptec RAID arrays,
we would introduce into OpenBSD the one-and-only piece of code that we
had no way of fixing, even when we *already*know* that it is in need of
repairs. Other things in OpenBSD have bugs, surely, but we can and will
fix them. This we would not be able to fix.
We also would be abandoning our freedom. This obviously means nothing
to you, but it means a great deal to us.
In short, you say that, if we wish to use Adaptec products, we must
abandon two of our most closely held principles--quality and freedom.
We also must do things the Adaptec way--with your binary-only
Adaptec-specific management program--rather than the OpenBSD way--with
a standard interface for *all* similar products. We respond that we are
unwilling to do so, and will first drop Adaptec like a hot potato.
(This after we have made repeated requests for what, in any other
industry, would be either a standard practice or a legal mandate.) You
then have the gall to insult us and claim that, by exercising our right
to spend our time and our money as we wish, we are somehow depriving
people of their freedom.
What on Earth did Adaptec do to you that you hate them so much that
work so hard to convince people to avoid them like the plague? Whatever
it is, it's yet another reason why we should do exactly that.
Cheers,
b&
[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had
a name of PGP.sig]
|