RustyRussell

Pretty sure Carl has heard of them, having worked for Adam Back with me at Blockstream...

Sorry.

I implemented the current NAT system in Linux. In particular, avoiding port reservation in favor of squishing more connections into one IP address, as long as the remote address allowed us to differentiate.

This, in turn, means incoming traffic from a different address is unroutable. You no longer have a public endpoint. This is "poor man's firewall", but erodes our ability to have a server the way we used to.

I was a young engineer solving a specific problem, without considering the larger picture. It wasn't the only thing, but I feel it definitely moved the internet to a client/server infrastructure and a key equality was lost.

I was confused. But yes, that same Zilog Corporation as the Z80. They also did... action comics as promotional material?

The final page, containing disclaimers (presumably from their standard spec sheets?) disclaiming any inaccuracy and warning "Not for use in life support" is adding, not removing, my confusion.

Always use -Wundef. For CCAN all config vars use #if and we lint for ifdefs of them, because you have to pick a side here, and sometimes using HAVE_X in C code is useful, so I prefer always-defined.

How embarrassing! It's greatspectations.org not .com! And I can't edit the URL.

Thanks, I will resubmit, and let's pretend this never happened? Eeek...

Nobody who would code this up would be entirely sane. But I can't help thinking "these are my people" when I read this...

I hacked up a (not SMP-safe!) compressed loopback driver for a now-forgotten startup's "bootable business card" rescue disk. Over a year later I received an email from someone wanting to use it who was trying to port it forward.

When someone on my team started playing with this new Knoppix thing I was blown away: not just a rescue disk but a full-on distribution!

Moral: publish your hacks!

Hey, I found the email:

Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 02:17:47 +0200 From: Klaus Knopper <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Compressed Loopback device Message-ID: <[email protected]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i Sender: [email protected]

Hello Mr. Russel,

I'm trying to use your compressed loopback device as found on the LinuxCare rescue CD-Rom, for my selfconfiguring Linux distribution that runs entirely from CD (including XFree and KDE).

Unfortunately, the version that I got of the cloop device seems to act quite instable (of course I recompiled it for Kernel 2.2.15, which should not differ all too much from 2.2.14). I blame it on the fact that the file handle is being read from stdin of insmod, but it could be something different.

With an SMP-Kernel, cloop.o crashes immediately on insmod when calling fget(0). With a non-SMP kernel, it kills the kernel block buffer system, shutting down all other block devices as well, when accessing certain large files on an ext2 filesystem within the compressed block device file. It seems that the ll_rw_block() routine fails in that case, and wait_for_buffer() never returns, locking up something in the kernel block buffer management.

Do you maybe have a newer version of cloop that I can start working on? Btw, I found and fixed the bug in extract_compressed_fs.c, but I think it would really be nice if the sources for the whole package could be downloaded from LinuxCare somewhere without having to get the whole CD-Rom image.

If I find the cloop lockup-bug before you have time to answer, I will send a patch.

Regards

                -Klaus Knopper

--- Klaus Knopper LinuxTag 2000 - Europes largest Linux Expo

Um, the Linux Foundation is an industry body, not a user or community group. You seem confused?

Yeah, but there's little culture of actually taking that time.

It seems that wasn't the Claude part, though I haven't seen a full analysis of exactly what broke. I also only saw one report: are there multiple, or do you just perceive that?

Rsync has many options: I can totally believe that fixing a bug in one place broke someone's usage, to be fair.

I'm shocked that people are jumping on one of the most productive and powerful OSS maintainers in existence.

The actual Claude "churn" is mainly test suite enhancement.

"where intellectual property is not respected"

This suggests to me the underlying concern is "but I won't get paid for my craft!".

Hell hath no fury like a vested interest masquerading as a moral principle?