Re: "obsolete" hardware

Mike A. Harris (
Thu, 12 Jun 1997 00:24:59 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, yuri mironoff wrote:

> > Are you the one doing development? If a maintainer chooses to maintain
> > backwards compatibility, are you in a position to stop them? No. This is
> > the beauty of collaborative, free development; noone dictates to Solar
> > Designer how he designs his non-executable stack patch, noone dictated to
> > Alan and Co. when they were redesigning the networking code for 2.0.
> Yes I'm doing development for Linux - and no our software can't
> possibly run on 386 and provide all the features we're building into it.

*I* Run Linux on both a 386-DX-40 and a 486-DX2-66. I use Linux
because I'm sick of having OS's that crash as they please or let
applications crash the system as they please. Although I would
LOVE to have a dodeca-P8 and 64 terabytes of memory, at this time
it is beyond my budget. I do however enjoy Linux, and do look
forward to new versions with new features. BOTH machines make
use of the new features that have come with new versions of
Linux, and I'm glad that they always will.

If your software cant run on a 386, then by all means - purchase
a quad ALPHA/266 or whatever you need.

Your big mouth has done nothing more than ANNOY the people who
are coding the latest enhancements to Linux, as well as myself.
Your constant bickering and arguments are fruitless as it boils
down to some simple facts:

1) Linux is FREE

2) It is coded by people who do it for FREE

3) The coders code WHAT *THEY* want to code with their time

4) No one is going to drop support for ANYTHING if they don't
want to regardless of what any bigot like you says.

5) You are wasting your time complaining on this group in the
negative manner that you've been relentlessly bombarding us

6) I'm sick of hearing about it because your postings are not
getting you anywhere and are actually PREVENTING the coders
from coding because they have to read your stupid posts.

7) Considering the money that you've personally spent on Linux
development to anyone on this list or in the credits, I'd say
that your current setup was a real bargain for the dollar.

8) Linux is/was/continues to be a HACKERS OS, so if you want
something done to it, you can ASK NICELY, and if the current
development team says NO, then crack out gcc and vi and start
HACKING, and paying back the Linux community with your own

> > Just because you are a bleeding-edge bigot, do not force it on the rest of
> > us who choose not to upgrade every time Intel decides to release a new
> > chip.
> There is software out there thats NOT networking related and I dont
> need to be a biggot to want it to finish running before I'm dead and
> buried.

Then either:

1) Purchase a faster computer.
2) Use an operating system / hardware combo that accomplishes
what you need done in the fastest time possible for the least
amount of cash.
3) Write your own operating system.

> > > Let me also put it in a financial perspective. Our company is
> > > developing a distributed IDE. It so happens that Linux is the target
> > > platform. I would hate to explain to my boss that the bright side of
> > > the situation is that "Linux works on a 386".
> >
> > Ah, threats. Welcome to Linux. You know, a *free development cycle*, with
> > people working on this because they love it, not because they're
> > necessarily making money doing it. We have, because of this, one of the
> > most finely crafted UNIX variants in existance. (Whoa, I'm starting to
> > sound like someone on comp.os.linux.advocacy...)
> This is not a threat - I'm telling you that we are trying to further
> Linux by developing for it. The reason is simple: we love the operating
> system and think it deserves to have the best software. What we DONT think
> is that Linux should be condemned to routing duty only. Wake up and smell
> the software.

You're hardly "furthering" Linux development by annoying and
agrivating the developers, by the incessant bickering in
your postings. Linux development is not at a standstill and
certainly does NOT NEED YOU to get where it's going - remember
that. Linux is being back-ported to 286 class machines, and as
long as there are 386 machines out there, there will be Linux for
386 processors, and Linux development for 386 processors.

*YOUR* ideal situation is *NOT* *MY* ideal situation, and neither
is it anyone else's. If I had it my way, I'd have all of the
development people put a month's effort into DOSemu and Wine
development and halt kernel development, but do you see me
bothering them? NO.

If you want something done, ask *nicely*.
If it is not feasible, be prepared for a NOT-A-CHANCE answer.
If you don't like that, then code it yourself.

This isn't a dictatorship project that is made for *YOUR*
purposes. It is a FREE project for everyone, by everyone.
Obviously not for you.

Suggestion: Try another operating system and leave the developers
alone as you CERTAINLY don't understand or fit into
the Linux mandate.

No reply expected or needed. Flames will be filtered by the
nifty procmail program.