Re: [Libcdio-devel] [PATCH] Remove unnecessary high-memory safe wrapper for DosDevIOCtl() on OS/2

[Rocky Bernstein]

On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 3:40 AM, KO Myung-Hun <address@hidden> wrote:

>
>
> Rocky Bernstein wrote:
> > You have described why there should be a libcdio for OS/2 but not why it
> is
> > a bad idea for libcdio stop development, and more to the point, pass it
> on
> > to someone else to be developed elsewhere.
> >
> > I won't go again into why libcdio developers can't support OS/2. At this
> > point let's just take it as a fact.
> >
> > If you care about continuing development on OS/2, then with my blessing
> > take the code and make necessary changes you want and share that with
> > others.
> >
>
> The fact that libcdio developers except me cannot support OS/2 has not
> changed at all.


If you want to be considered a libcdio developer nowadays, you need to fill
out an FSF copyright assignment form.
Send email to address@hidden asking for the form.


> This cannot be the reason why OS/2 codes should be
> forked.


It is.  Several years ago we talked about providing a server that libcdio
developers could
log into to test. That never materialized.


> In addition, the fact that I willing to test functionality and
> submit patches if needed has not been changed at all.
>

You have not been doing a good job. This patch is several years too
late for a platform that no one other than yourself seems to care about.


When discussions of libcdio regarding OS/2 come up, you've not been around.
See this thread: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libcdio-devel/
2014-06/msg00004.html

When discussions around adding the MMC sense command have come up which
needs OS support, you've not been around.
OS/2 support is currently lacking here. It is incumbent on you to keep up
with what's going on and make sure the OS/2 driver tracks
changes in the API.


> Why do OS/2 codes should be forked ?


> > This is basically what eComStation and ArcaOS must do. I doubt you get
> > their development from IBM's web or download servers.
> >
>
> I'm sorry. I don't know what you mean.
>

It means that if you care about libcdio and OS/2, you need to do that in a
different repository.


> > On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 7:38 AM, KO Myung-Hun <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Rocky Bernstein wrote:
> >>>  I didn't have to do any activity for OS/2.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This is *exactly *the wrong-minded thinking that  brings us to the
> >> current
> >>>  problem. You didn't do activity on OS/2 libcdio, but others (and
> >> possibly
> >>> you) did make changes on kLIBC. And when things change in the
> (preferred)
> >>> OS environment or in libcdio, someone has to check that things haven't
> >>> broken. That's why we have the libcdio tests.
> >>>
> >>> Someone has to be running those periodically. None of the libcdio
> >>> developers have a way to easily test this on OS2, so we haven't.  I
> >> thought
> >>> it was the understanding that you were going to take on this
> >> responsibility.
> >>>
> >>> And that's the *only *reason OS/2 support hasn't been dropped
> altogether
> >>> before, which in my opinion is the responsible thing to do.
> >>
> >> You're right. And I already admitted that it was my mistake to think
> >> that just build test was enough.
> >>
> >>> IBM has said
> >>> "end of life support" was 2006. Well in 2016 I think we need to say
> from
> >>> the libcdio side, that's also officially the case.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes and No. IBM said so. But, OS/2 is still being supported and sold as
> >> eComStation(http://www.ecomstation.com/) and
> >> ArcaOS(https://www.arcanoae.com/).
> >>
> >>> Do you mean fork ? Or other branch ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I mean fork. In other words, copy the git repository or work from
> release
> >>> tarballs or however you prefer to handle it.
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, I don't think it would be a good idea.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Why not?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Because OS/2 does not encounter "end of life support" IBM said, yet. And
> >> I still willing to submit patches for OS/2 if needed although I missed a
> >> proper time to send the patch once. In addition, I'll run test programs
> >> as well as build them. :)
> >>
> >> --
> >> KO Myung-Hun
> >>
> >> Using Mozilla SeaMonkey 2.7.2
> >> Under OS/2 Warp 4 for Korean with FixPak #15
> >> In VirtualBox v4.1.32 on Intel Core i7-3615QM 2.30GHz with 8GB RAM
> >>
> >> Korean OS/2 User Community : http://www.ecomstation.co.kr
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> --
> KO Myung-Hun
>
> Using Mozilla SeaMonkey 2.7.2
> Under OS/2 Warp 4 for Korean with FixPak #15
> In VirtualBox v4.1.32 on Intel Core i7-3615QM 2.30GHz with 8GB RAM
>
> Korean OS/2 User Community : http://www.ecomstation.co.kr
>
>
>