Professional Web Applications Themes

aac support - FreeBSD

re: http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=10032&offset=15&rows=28 See a posting from Scott Long of FreeBSD; --- Thanks for going to a public forum and saying I am full of crap. I really appreciate that. Boy, you sure do want to see all of our projects do well, don't you. Apparently you have zero idea of where we are going. While you are content with shipping binary stuff in your source tree and in your ports tree, we are not. We do not ship binaries. We are not interested in shipping a binary for some CLI. We actually do have the Linux CLI working in emulation, ...

  1. #1

    Default aac support

    re: http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=10032&offset=15&rows=28

    See a posting from Scott Long of FreeBSD;

    ---
    Thanks for going to a public forum and saying I am full of crap.

    I really appreciate that. Boy, you sure do want to see all of
    our projects do well, don't you.

    Apparently you have zero idea of where we are going.

    While you are content with shipping binary stuff in your source tree
    and in your ports tree, we are not. We do not ship binaries. We are
    not interested in shipping a binary for some CLI. We actually do have
    the Linux CLI working in emulation, but we will not supply it to our
    user community. I have cancelled that effort by that developer. We
    will not supply something to our user community that they cannot fix
    and improve themselves.

    We have been talking with Adaptec for 4 months. They have not
    given us management information.

    We have been talking to Adaptec for more than a year to get other RAID
    controller information, as in, how to even get the mailbox stuff
    fixed. They have not given that to us, either.

    Noone thought to talk to you. You are, I am sure, under a
    non-disclosure agreement with Adaptec, and I am sure you would
    therefore not give us doentation. We are quite used to FreeBSD and
    Linux people signing NDA's by now. Yesterday on the phone Doug said
    "But we did give OpenBSD doentation, we gave them to Scott Long".

    Thus, Doug mentioned that *you* had doentation, and thought that
    was enough. Of course it is not. You do not help us, I told him.
    That is not how it works. And so it stands -- we still have no
    doentation.

    Did I get an offer from you for doentation before you went onto a
    public site and said I was full of crap? No, I did not.

    And I expect that now that you have said I am full of crap, we still
    will get no doentation from you. Right?


    We are working on a driver-independent raid management framework. One
    command (perhaps called raidctl(4), we don't know) that should work on
    any controller from any vendor, which would do management, because the
    management stuff would be abstracted in a driver-independent way into
    each driver. Yes this is a difficult project. We have support for
    AMI almost working. We will support some other product, as well, then
    we'll see where Adaptec stands.

    I do a lot of work on OpenBSD. I am sure that you do a lot of work on
    your stuff in FreeBSD too, so you know what it is to be a very busy
    busy person.

    When a vendor ignores me and the efforts of 4 other people trying to
    get the vendor to listen -- for that long, we have no choice.

    Yet, you, Scott, you think that you are therefore able to slag us and
    call us wrong, because YOU are in the loop and we are not? Because
    you used to WORK at Adaptec, and we did not? That somehow makes us
    full of crap?

    I have been watching the mail going to Doug over the last 24 hours.

    I have been counting controllers mentioned in mails and am now up to
    over 1,800 Adaptec RAID controllers, with people from very large
    commercial operations complaining that they have been switching to
    other controllers (or, having now seen Adaptec's failure in this
    regard, that they will now actively not buy Adaptec again).

    Those controllers will not be supported in OpenBSD 3.7 in May. If
    Adaptec wishes them to be supported in a future release, they had
    better come and make amends. We are sick of supporting the hardware
    of vendors who on their customers via us. Maybe they can repair
    this horrid situation enough that we will once again support their
    controllers by the time OpenBSD 3.8 ships in November.

    Quite frankly, you don't understand what we are trying to do, and
    Scott, this is just like the binary only Atheros driver that FreeBSD
    ships.

    I like it when all hardware is supported with source code, but just
    because our methods for getting there are different than yours, Scott,
    that gives you absolutely no right to go posting such a thing as you
    did there.

    Shame on you.
    Theo Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: aac support

    To make it easier for people to find Scott Long's post to
    osnews.com here it is in full:

    ---

    Direct comment link From a BSD and former Adaptec person...
    By Scott (IP: ---.samsco.org) - Posted on 2005-03-19 19:02:37

    I don't know if it's better to post this here or onto the openbsd-misc
    list, but anyways....

    First, Theo is full of crap. I'll say that again: Theo is full of
    crap. I don't think that he's actually interested in making the AAC
    cards work. Instead, I think that he's interested in stirring
    controversy, petty bullying, and silly 'freedom' tripe.

    I worked at Adaptec for almost five years, until last year. I worked
    on the FreeBSD (and Linux) AAC driver, and I ported the AAC management
    CLI to FreeBSD. It's available right now in the FreeBSD ports tree. I
    also added the proper shims to the driver so that the Linux AACCLI
    would work under emulation. The fact that I did these things is pretty
    well known in the BSD community; several other projects have contacted
    me over the years for help and information about AAC. But during the
    time the Theo claims that he's cared about AAC, he NEVER ONCE
    CONTACTED ME! If he had come to me before I left and asked for help on
    making all of this AAC stuff work on OpenBSD, I would have been happy
    to help him. Heck, I might have even ported the AACCLI for him on my
    own.

    Unfortuntely, Theo chose to ignore resources that would have helped
    him, and instead chose his normal super-confrontational antics. I have
    to commend Doug Richardson (one of the nicest men I've ever worked
    with, BTW) for his very appropriate response. If Adaptec provides an
    open SDK later this year, good for them, but it certainly is not due
    to Theo.

    Theo could have had AACCLI support years ago, but chose not to. I hope
    he removes the driver from the tree. That would really teach everyone
    how mature and 'right' he is.

    Scott Long
    Theo Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: aac support

    Theo de Raadt wrote: 

    Oh boo hoo. You never contacted me. Others in that past have. No, I
    can't now and never could before give out docs, but I've always been
    happy to help, review code, point out bugs, etc. Ask the BSD/OS guys,
    ask the OSDL guys, on and on and on. And as for trying to expose my
    evil conspriarcy against OpenBSD via Doug, you might want to leave
    him out of it. If you have questions, ask them and I'll do my best to
    answer them. Otherwise, stop crying that no one will help you.

    Scott
    Scott Guest

  4. Moderated Post

    Default Re: aac support

    Removed by Administrator
    Sean Guest
    Moderated Post

  5. Moderated Post

    Default Re: aac support

    Removed by Administrator
    Aaron Guest
    Moderated Post

  6. #6

    Default Re: aac support

     

    Your flippant reply, doesn't illustrate the source of the real
    problem. Companies in the U.S. are driven by two things, Public
    customer feedback, and a collection of Lawyers, Accounants, Marketing
    Types, and other Feather Merchants. Normally the second collection of
    idiots decides what the company should be doing based on it's notion
    of whatever they can do to achieve "customer traction" - the best
    description of what that is is the friction between the customers
    knees and elbows and the floor when they're in a favorable position
    for the company.

    Companies taken over by this sort of evil will inevitably
    do as little as possible, and release as little as possible, unless
    forced. they know they have ot at least pay lip service to free
    software, but now the latest trend is to find a willing shill who
    will sign an NDA, produce a "binary only" layer so they don't have
    to release full doentation, Why? because their lawyers and marketing
    types don't think it's important, and won't, ever, unless customers
    say so. Otherwise sane people in the company will be unable or
    unwilling to fight the pit vipers unless there is ammunition from
    the commnity to support it.

    Projects welcoming support for hardware that can only
    be supported in this way encourage this sort of thing continuing.
    While I understant and empathize with the attitude of a developer
    who wants to do this to help people whose hardware otherwise wouldn't
    work at all, making support work partially, or via NDA, removes the
    pressure from the company to release stuff so their hardware is
    supportable. The "free" os can now say that it supports it, so the
    users think they are happier. The company can now pay lip service
    publicly to say "we support free os's" - the fact that they really
    don't is completely lost on the customers. Who loses? the free
    software community as a whole.

    OpenBSD has a definate stance againse this sort of
    binary only layer support. FreeBSD now seems to be incorporating
    binary only support into it's kernel, which is kind of sad, but
    that's their choice.

    I think customers of these companies need to stand up
    and be counted to say that they don't like hardware that can only
    be fully supported under NDA. Only vocal customer feedback lets
    the sane people within a company fight the lawyers and other bottom
    feeders to do the right thing. I think people should be asking
    if they want to use hardware like this, and if they really want
    it supported by default. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with
    a piece of hardware that says "NDA only - run windows, or a particular
    version of linux that you can load our driver on". But I don't
    think a free OS should encourage this by including support for
    this, so users think they are buying supported hardware when they
    really are buying a ball and chain.

    -Bob






    Bob Guest

  7. #7

    Default RE: aac support


     
    > sure they'll 
    >
    > Your flippant reply, doesn't illustrate the source of the real
    > problem. Companies in the U.S. are driven by two things, Public
    > customer feedback, and a collection of Lawyers, Accounants, Marketing
    > Types, and other Feather Merchants. Normally the second collection of
    > idiots decides what the company should be doing based on it's notion
    > of whatever they can do to achieve "customer traction" - the best
    > description of what that is is the friction between the customers
    > knees and elbows and the floor when they're in a favorable position
    > for the company.
    >
    > Companies taken over by this sort of evil will inevitably
    > do as little as possible, and release as little as possible, unless
    > forced. they know they have ot at least pay lip service to free
    > software, but now the latest trend is to find a willing shill who
    > will sign an NDA, produce a "binary only" layer so they don't have
    > to release full doentation, Why? because their lawyers and marketing
    > types don't think it's important, and won't, ever, unless customers
    > say so. Otherwise sane people in the company will be unable or
    > unwilling to fight the pit vipers unless there is ammunition from
    > the commnity to support it.
    >[/ref]

    Bob,

    Your missing something. One of the big reasons the companies
    want to have NDA's and binary-only drivers is because they know that
    a binary driver may break with future versions of the OS.

    So eventually the new version of FreeBSD will have some internal
    change that breaks AAC support, and the developer that had the NDA
    for AAC support won't be around any longer, and that card will then
    become worthless.

    And so then the userbase has to go buy a new card. And the cycle
    repeats all over again.

    How many people have basements full of boxes of perfectly good hardware
    peripherals that work just a good as the brand new peripherals, but they
    can't use because the manufacturer didn't release drivers for the new
    OSes?

    Ted

    Ted Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: aac support

    On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 12:38:48PM -0700, Scott Long wrote: 

    Information is power.

    You control that information. You signed an NDA, and Adaptec gave you the
    doentation. Stuff you can't share. Why can't you share it ? Because
    you signed the NDA.

    But that's not the point.

    I'm sure you love it that people have to come to you, and that you can
    play at being the old (senile?) wise guy on the mountain who will educate
    the young coder, and show him the error of his ways `no, young one, you
    see (whack on the head), that's not how you write code for this card.'

    And so it goes. So, you're quite happy in the current situation, because
    you think you have relevance.

    Apart from that, you might be someone quite nice. I don't know, I don't
    care.

    I don't see why you should wield that kind of power over me.
    I don't see why I should have to trust you if you say `this code is good'.

    Heck, I don't even know you.

    Which is a very good reason for me to want OpenBSD to have the
    actual doentation.

    See, Theo is definitely not the nicest person in the world.

    But I know him.

    And I trust him, and my fellow OpenBSD developers, to write correct code
    from the doentation.

    NDA crap ? yeah right. It makes practical sense. I see enough economical
    practical CRAP sense at work. I don't want it to invade the world of
    Truely Free Software. I hate NDIS, I hate nvidia binary drivers. I hate
    NDA. They're a really bad compromise, as most users WON'T CARE, and so the
    vendors can go on writing crappy binary drivers and pushing Windows.
    Marc Guest

  9. Moderated Post

    Default Re: aac support

    Removed by Administrator
    Jason Guest
    Moderated Post

  10. Moderated Post

    Default Re: aac support

    Removed by Administrator
    Theo Guest
    Moderated Post

  11. Moderated Post

    Default Re: aac support

    Removed by Administrator
    Tobias Guest
    Moderated Post

  12. Moderated Post

    Default RE: aac support

    Removed by Administrator
    Mark Guest
    Moderated Post

  13. Moderated Post

    Default Re: aac support

    Removed by Administrator
    John Guest
    Moderated Post

  14. #14

    Default Re: aac support


    * Theo de Raadt [2005-03-19 20:27 -0700] 


    Seems to me that you need to get in contact with the stock holders of
    these companies. I do not know too much about the USA, but in Norway
    everyone who owns (any number of) stock in any public company, have a
    legal right to attend the general assembly that such companies are legally
    bound to organize every year. As a stock holder you hva ethe right to both
    speak at the general assembly and to propose a case trialed and to demand
    a issue to be considered and dealt with.

    Why not buy exactly one (1) stock in each and every hardware company there
    is in the USA? Show up, speak to the audience (the other stock holders),
    and have your case heard.

    Also, the stock holder register is probably also open to the public, which
    mean you could contact each and every one of the other stock holders and
    let them hear your case. I am sure Adaptec (or any other company) would
    want to listen to their owners.


    But then again; what do I know about business?


    Svein Halvor
    Svein Guest

Similar Threads

  1. I want FMS support P2P.
    By Digitalboy(China) in forum Macromedia Flash Flashcom
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 6th, 04:44 PM
  2. XML support in PHP 5
    By Juliano in forum PHP Development
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 25th, 12:08 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139