From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EBqS3-0004hd-QO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2005 09:06:12 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8492aCM018690; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 09:02:36 GMT Received: from himura.kakuri.org (minden014.server4you.de [217.172.177.14]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8490pNg022462 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 09:00:51 GMT Received: from [192.168.2.89] (dsl-084-059-055-078.arcor-ip.net [84.59.55.78]) by himura.kakuri.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAEF879C002 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 11:03:45 +0200 (CEST) From: Christian Parpart Organization: Gentoo Foundation To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64 Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2005 11:08:58 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <20050901171028.GW18440@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> <20050902013842.GB29532@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <4317D508.3060106@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4317D508.3060106@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1720781.RiUDRajrXp"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200509041109.00561.trapni@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 436998c2-674a-4b92-8343-91ec07832dbb X-Archives-Hash: b495fc8162cad7708226f21adcb1ade9 --nextPart1720781.RiUDRajrXp Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 02 September 2005 06:28, Lance Albertson wrote: > Grant Goodyear wrote: > > Christian Parpart wrote: [Thu Sep 01 2005, 05:45:43PM CDT] > > > >>This just leads me to assume you're not really a coder (wrt native > >>programming languages like C/C++), are you? > > > > *Grin* This sort of condescending attitude is rarely wise when it comes > > to dealing with Gentoo devs. Not only does it tend to annoy people > > (yes, I'm a tad annoyed by the presumption), but since you're still > > relatively new here the odds are that people know the person you're > > being condescending to better than they know you, and thus it just makes > > you look bad if you're wrong. Feel free to ask people what I do for a > > living, and whether they suspect that I know the difference between a > > 64-bit pointer and a 32-bit int. > > Ha! Yeah ... kids these days... just don't respect their elders like > they should ;-). I have seen more and more 'newish' devs speaking their > minds like this without even knowing/asking the person. I guess respect > and tactfulness isn't being taught anymore... > > And yes, Grant definitely knows the difference :-) Maybe I do not understand the diffference between "I assume" and "I know", = and=20 "I know" I meant the first, however, in that case, Grant, I do not know why= =20 you're requesting this combine when you know about these "issues" already.= =20 Don't get me wrong, I am (though, I was) just curious, and really surprised= =20 how the hell ppl (telling to be coders) can even think about such merges. I= t=20 might - of course - *somehow* still be possible, but I just do not believe= =20 in, as I posted earlier (by example). And just like kintaco said, there're not only ppl outside that do know why= =20 those archs are different, there're also ppl outside that even make use of= =20 such things on *their* main arch (x86) and do not care (or did) about 64bit= =20 compats, in fact, most do not know that this piece of could would lead into= =20 semantic errors on such archs anyway. As said, don't get me wrong, I'm neither new (depends on definition!) nor a= m I=20 "missing respect". I was just sharing some by-example snippets why this is = a=20 bad idea, and I was just "assuming" (not "know") why I said what I said. Regards, Christian Parpart. --nextPart1720781.RiUDRajrXp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDGrmsPpa2GmDVhK0RAjqYAJ9pkwY7EinebSa3EmGgFGKYLyvBDgCdHDHF 8YB5XBpvoY2cqAWM40a2I2A= =Y5An -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1720781.RiUDRajrXp-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list