Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 13:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <200410252050.i9PKoWsQ066551@xl2.seyza.com>
From: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
To: mlh@zipworld.com.au
In-reply-to: <20041022043144.GA25579@zipworld.com.au> (mlh@zipworld.com.au)
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File naming conventions
References: <1098156854.19575.65.camel@whiskas.cashpoolcomps.com>
	<buok6tn1foz.fsf@mctpc71.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp>
	<1098163496.19575.134.camel@whiskas.cashpoolcomps.com>
	<20041019060152.GC18852@wisq.net>
	<1098311382.11967.35.camel@nemesis.xlii.org>
	<1098313564.5336.29.camel@whiskas.cashpoolcomps.com>
	<vpqmzyhhrhi.fsf@ecrins.imag.fr>
	<1098319598.5336.46.camel@whiskas.cashpoolcomps.com>
	<20041021123218.GA30989@fencepost>
	<1098398014.5336.118.camel@whiskas.cashpoolcomps.com>
	<20041022043144.GA25579@zipworld.com.au>
Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org, zen@cashpoolcomps.com
Precedence: list
Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Status: RO
Content-Length: 2065
Lines: 61

    > From: mlh@zipworld.com.au

    > 	http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-arch-users/2004-03/msg00740.html

    > 	"Null quoting (like find's print0) is completely
    > 	inappropriate for those purposes."

    > 	"The -print0 hack is a broken idea."

    > By the sound of that, Tom is going to replace all of unix
    > from libc up.

Isn't it convenient that I live in a period of history when Unicode is
ascendent and many commercially-driven software architectures are about
to collapse (over the next 0..7 yrs)?   Don't you realize that libc is
a kind of accident: essentially an arbitrary "freeze" of an
experimental tree at Bell Labs plus accretions from the the rest of
the early unix community?

Fuck right I'm replacing libc-on-up.   Better to do it now, while it's
still vaguely human-scale, than to wait another 10 years.

Meanwhile, of course, there's the question of how to progress on that
goal while still producing pragmatically useful spin-offs, such as
arch.


    > I've given up complaining, because
    > 	1. it does no good
    > 	2. i've gotten used to the sharp corners mostly
    > 	2. the fundamental design is so excellent it seems
    > 	    churlish to complain

There are some nasty sharp corners that are bad accidents, but far
fewer than most whiners think, I think.

Most of the nasty sharp corners --- I hate to say it but --- a lot of
them are pretty essential.   Emergent properties of the low-level
characteristics of the universe, so to speak.   Instead of giving up
on them, you might want to look into them a bit and see if you can't
gain some metaphysical insight from their seeming necessity.


    > Which would be ok because I could scratch my own itch.
    > However gnuarch seems to have eruptions every now and
    > then which make navigation difficult.

Popularity breeds opportunists.

-t


_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users

GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/