On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 05:56:32PM -0400, STeve Andre' wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 October 2005 17:32, OpenBSD Admin wrote:
> >
> > So where does one post questions *after* having read the FAQ etc
in misc@, ports@, or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tho' posting questions that could be answered by the self with
less than or equal to the amount of time it takes to write, send, wait,
receive
and read a reply's worth of archives/google...
those are the candidates for the FU.
> > If I was a developer I'd be posting to the tech@ list woudln't I.
myself, i haven't ever posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] tbh, i don't think i
_deserve_ to. you could find my name referenced in cvs commits
across the 3-ish years i've been using openbsd maybe, oh, five times.
woo. maybe some people think i'm capable of a good post to tech@,
maybe some people think i'm a moron... if a committer wrote me
and told me i'm a moron, who the hell am i to argue? i'm on his turf.
completely unrelatedly (i'm getting a power meter who measures
wattage usage and am thinking all about that now), i was curious
about whether or not the powernow-k7 would work on my one athlon machine.
my dmesg says "Powernow: TS", and hw.setperf is nonexistant
( learned about that variable, iirc, from list ).
i went through /usr/src with find and grep looking
for 'Powernow', and found it in machdep.c under i386; looked in there
and found that 'TS' is one of six variables that it might print
out according to what it sees my chip support. if it finds all 6
or just the last one (dunno), it then apparently jumps to setting
up the setperf/powernow stuff.
granted, i cannot manage 'gcc' and 'hello world' in the same sentence.
but that's no excuse to no go and _look_, sometimes i find something
useful, othertimes i miss something _completely_, but anyway....
i poked around more on google and a few different archives;
saw a few posts on different lists, saw a diff to try, applied it,
recompiled, rebooted, and didn't notice anything in the dmesg.
shot an innocuous email off to the originator of the diff
saying essentially "hi, i tried it too, i know the diff/post is
old; it didn't give me any more output, thanks for your time bye".
if whomever i send such an email to says "hey, that jared guy,
i'll give him something else to try, he seems like he's not
a complete jackass", then i go from there; if he says "hey,
jared guy, piss the f' off i'm busy", i piss the f' off.
whether it is the form of a specific diff, or just 'changes
in the snapshots', announcements of request for testing
are, imo, fielded to whatever target audience is appropriate
for that testing to be performed by.
to use an analogy my supervisor coined today, you don't
go work on a cowboy ranch, and then get all huffy when
a cowboy yells at you for doing stupid shit, and
say "excuuuse me mr. cowboy sir, you don't have to be so ruuude
to me when you yell at me here at your cowboy ranch"...
if what you were doing is not stupid in a different context,
that's not relevant.
thus far, i don't think i've gotten yelled at; but if i do
get yelled at, it'll probably not be unwarranted and i'll
go and find out why i earned it.
just recently there was a thread where someone did something
dumb, got reamed progressively larger, got a bit pissed and
retorted for a bit, but then apparently realized that people
weren't attacking him or his family or his favourite
automobile, they were attacking his ${wrong_action}.
seems he let that sink in and has probably found out why/how
it got to that point to begin with. there was also one
a little bit prior to that, real similar situation, where
the poster acted like he was Captain Pants and got all
sarcastic and acted like a dick. someone with a crappy
agenda will come back with a "how dare you insult
[EMAIL PROTECTED]", or sometimes they pull this
"well, you guys are the ones who will suffer, i'm only trying to help"
nonsense attitude and likely not be very welcome in the future;
someone who is interested in sticking around will suck it up and
say "whoops, i fucked up, i'll shut up now" is more likely
to be welcome and receive future beneficial outcomes, provided
they took the situation to heart.
> > Theo ?
all you really have to do is read the archives; petitioning
some dude who has no shortage of openbsd-centric work to do
to come down and spell it out is kinda crappy. if they offer
that, that's different. maybe it is only me who it occurs
to like that though..
--
jared
[ openbsd 3.8 GENERIC ( oct 15 ) // i386 ]
