Design your own Linux-shoes
Title: eu.CMAX.com Sending "Spam" to Linux-users. How dumb can these guys be you must be thinking? This is like teaching Bill Gates the word "open source" or like having sex with Mrs. Tyson. So, before you bomb the hell out of us or instantly block all of our IP addresses, please do listen up. We're not as stupid as you might think. We, like you, are proud Linuxers ourselves, so how could we be? We got your address searching on linux sites and we promise we will only use it once. What do you say? Deal?Here are two helpful tips to assist you in designing yourself the coolest sneakers ever:1. Take Your time, Don't Rush It.Wed rather see you returning to CMAX to buy your shoes again (because you were so pleased with your first design) than not coming back at all because you designed something hideous. Save your cool shoe designs in your personal CMAX portfolio until youre ready to buy. Its almost the same as asking the girl in the shop if she can stow them away on the top shelf until you return tomorrow.2. Read How it Works. We clearly explain on our site (leftside always) how to design your ultimate puppies. A Team of ex-adidas Shoe Dogs left the corporate world and started the CMAX-brand in 1999. We've made sure that our Chinese employee's would benefit from our company. As a result we've been rewarded by having a ISO-9002 certificate, and believe us, you don't get one of these if you are not 110% taking care of your fellow workers in addition to utilizing the best possible materials. Also, as far as we know, we are the only retailer having the phone number and address of the factory online. So whenever you're close to Chenhzen, China, please do drop by and have a beer with us.Your own logo next to TUX? Yep, we can also do that. But we then we must call it Promotional Footwear. From a minimum of 30 pairs you can order shoes with your company logo, your sports team logo, your whatever-logo. We deliver within 4 weeks to every address within the US as well as Europe. Please pay us a visit on www.promoshoes.com to find out more.
Re: Is libtool being maintained at all?
Salut Nicholas, hello Bob, Nicholas Wourms wrote: Charles Wilson wrote: I'd guess not. It appears that debian's changes are all on the 1.4.3 branch, which is permanently and irrevocably dead. We really really really don't want to provide anybody with more excuses to stay on 1.4.3. If John Q. Developer wants new-and-improved libtool functionality, then we want JQD to use 1.5.x. Try telling that to the gcc people... They are still using some early prerelease of 1.4a for crying out loud! As one of kaffe's current build system developers I find the current situation very frustrating. We have changed over to libtool 1.5 shortly after it was released in order to get better support for our cross compiling developers and users. That works just fine, according to our users, and I'm very pleased about the decision to switch over to libtool 1.5. I'm also very grateful for the hard work that has gone into improving libtool for 1.5. Kaffe would not be as flexible as it is now without using libtool. That's the good part. Thank you all for creating libtool! The somewhat bad part is that we have discovered several problems with libtool 1.5, ranging from hour-long configure script checks to real bugs leading to crashes. We are getting regular bug reports for libtool 1.5, and fortunately, they are often accompanied by patches. ;) My humble attempts at getting the attention of libtool developers to our small and simple patches have so far failed to receive *any* response from libtool maintainers for more than a month now, despite repeated postings to both [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] I find that situation quite frustrating. On one hand, I hear people say: abandon 1.4 and use 1.5, on the other hand, when I use 1.5, I'm apparently on my own. If you don't want to provide excuses for people to use 1.4, please try to work together with people who are using 1.5 to resolve issues that come up. I would like to contribute to libtool, but I have the feeling that libtool maintainers are not interested in my contributions. In fact, I don't have the feeling that the libtool maintainers are interested in anyone's contribtions beside a small circle of initiated. It's not clear to me how to get into that circle. ;) The ugly part is that ignoring potential contributors may not buy you time in the long run. You may end up redoing the work already performed by contributors you ignore now. I don't believe that's the outcome anyone here would want. I need a working libtool for kaffe, which can (at least in theory ;) run on more than 50 platforms. I believe that everyone would be better off, if the libtool package maintainers on those platforms would/could work more closely with the libtool developers to keep improving the GNU libtool source base, instead of further increasing the gap with their local forks. Working local forks, frozen at older libtool versions, don't make the switch to a broken libtool 1.5 attractive. In order to have more people adopt libtool 1.5, I belive that this deadlock has to be broken up by everyone cooperating to make the next libtool release even better. I've tried to incite some closer cooperation by posting links to distribution specific libtool patches. Some of the package maintainers have even offered their support in getting the distribution specific patches in. To me, that's good sign, and I hope that these patches make it in some day. Just like I hope that kaffe's patches will receive a response some day, if I only keep reposting them often enough. ;) If that's not possible, maybe a 'most general unified' fork of libtool under a different umbrella could be a temporary, egcs-like solution to what I percieve to be a problem in the making. cheers, dalibor topic ___ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
Re: Is libtool being maintained at all?
On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, Dalibor Topic wrote: > Salut Nicholas, hello Bob, > > The somewhat bad part is that we have discovered several problems with > libtool 1.5, ranging from hour-long configure script checks to real bugs > leading to crashes. We are getting regular bug reports for libtool 1.5, > and fortunately, they are often accompanied by patches. ;) > > My humble attempts at getting the attention of libtool developers to our > small and simple patches have so far failed to receive *any* response > from libtool maintainers for more than a month now, despite repeated > postings to both [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] I find > that situation quite frustrating. This is not quite true. I am a libtool maintainer. I am not as well-versed as some of the other maintainers so if a more experienced maintainer is willing to handle an issue, that is fine with me. What is true is that there have been no updates to libtool since June 25th. I will attempt to find time to apply the outstanding libtool patches. I won't apply a patch if it comes from a non-current libtool, I don't understand the patch, or it is risky and I am unable to validate it. > If that's not possible, maybe a 'most general unified' fork of libtool > under a different umbrella could be a temporary, egcs-like solution to > what I percieve to be a problem in the making. A fork is totally unnecessary. Libtool maintainers seem to ebb and flow like the tide. Perhaps we are simply in an "ebb" period at the moment. If existing maintainers permanently die off, then new volunteers can become mainainers. Becoming a maintainer involves signing a contract with the FSF (takes two or three weeks) and being set up with CVS commit privileges. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen ___ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
Re: Is libtool being maintained at all?
Bob Friesenhahn wrote: A fork is totally unnecessary. Libtool maintainers seem to ebb and flow like the tide. Perhaps we are simply in an "ebb" period at the moment. Yes, it appears so. Personally, I was suprised at the relative lack of activity after 1.5.0 was released. (Sure, there were patches -- almost entirely related to the darwin port in my non-scientific survey -- but no new releases). libtool-1.5.0 came out on 14 Apr 2003 -- that's three months ago. given that it was the culmination of 2.5 years of work, and is a major departure from the 1.4.x codebase, I expected a flurry of bug reports and patches (which we got) followed by a flurry of rolling releases (which we didn't get). 1.5.1, 1.5.2, 1.5.3, 1.5.4 every two weeks or so, until the bugreports tapered off. But I guess the maintainers figured "Whew, that's done. Now we can rest for a while." Maintainers, please come back. We like you. :-) -- Chuck ___ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
