Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-8081-

GNU Autotools

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-29 20:05

Why the fuck is building a ``configure'' and ``make'' so complex, /prog/?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-29 20:08

It was designed to make use of existing technologies such as m4 and sh scripting.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-29 21:21

sudo make me a sandwich

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-29 23:12

>>1
Because of the GNUfaggotry.

Anonux will have none of that shit

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 9:46

>>1
It's for compatibility.

Anonux will have none of that shit

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 10:00

because GNU are arseholes

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 10:09

          ∧_∧   / ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄
          ( ´∀`) < IS TIME TRAVEL POSSIBLE?
        /    |    \________
       /       .|     
       / "⌒ヽ |.イ |
   __ |   .ノ | || |__
  .    ノく__つ∪∪   \
   _((_________\
    ̄ ̄ヽつ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ | | ̄
   ___________| |
    ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄| |

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 10:11

>>1
yeh cos typing 3 commands in a fucking terminal is *so* fucking difficult

banana faggot

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 10:14

sudo ./configure; make; make install

Durr.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 10:56

>>8,9
I am almost sure this is not what he was referring to.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:05

>>10 what was he referring to then?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:09

>>11

BUILDING a configure script and makefile,     ers.

So now, BACK TO/b/

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:13

>>12
Please calm down. And where are your manners?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:13

>>12
Please calm down. And where are your manners?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:17

>>12
it's still not so hard, just use an existing one as a template, most of them have helpful comments that noobs can learn from...
it's not so hard, seriously

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:22

>>9
./configure; make; sudo make install

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:23

Fuck, I meant &&.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:44

>>15
hahaha, oh wow

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:56

>>16
alias expert ='./configure && make && sudo make install'

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 11:59

By the way, I am so clever because I read this:

http://tinyurl.com/56nfbk

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 13:41

Autotools is a steaming pile of shit. However, the alternatives aren't much better. What's left, CMake?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 14:22

# emerge <program>

:3

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 14:41

>>22
OMG OPTIMIZED faggot

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 17:39

in before --funroll-loops

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 17:43

Oh, I see, you are so cool by using aptitude instead of apt-get

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 17:47

Another newb who posts shit. “Ubtuntu this and Ubuntu that”. God I’m so sick of these crap newbuntu articles. How does that have to do with newbuntu? All Linux distros do this you moron.

Name: 1 2008-04-30 19:59

>>22-26
Get out of my thread

>>15
...

>>21
Well, I'm writing the Makefile manually. It's mostly bourne-shell-like, so <3.

Also, I don't need to get it in any distro, nor make it easy to compile for faggots like >>8,9

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 21:38

Anonux?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 21:47

>>28
Probably a bunch of /pr/ faggots that realized that making your own GNAA/Lunix distro is easy as fuck and wanted to make a distro that ships with anoncoreutils.

I shudder at the thought.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-30 21:58

>>29
Google returns crap-that-is-not-even-in-fucking-english and /prog/ in the second and third result.

Particularly, the second result says dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1209524717/1-40 - 22 hours ago

So.. it was invented here. By the faggot that posted it

Name: Cudder !MhMRSATORI 2008-04-30 23:56

>>4,5,28,29,30
fuck, i was hoping to keep that quiet until next month

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 1:38

>>30
Oh, I thought it was the name of that Linux distro that a bunch of 7chan idiots started. They seem to want "Mudkips" and "hacking tools" in it.

I can't find the link right now and I really don't want to search for something like that.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 1:40

>>32
``Lulznix''.

Words cannot express the magnitude of the failure.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 2:31

http://lulznix.org/downloads/

``Optimized for nonexistance''

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 2:39

>>33
That was it. It'd be a perfect match for anoncoreutils, but I'm guessing Cudder!STOLENTRIP is going to start his own Ubunturd clone for it.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 2:58

http://lulznix.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12
when the pedobear icon is clicked, have Ash Ketchum pop on screen and say PEDOBEAR! I CHOOSE YOU! and pokeball thrown etc etc and the pedobear icon grows in size as the wipe progresses. win?
Dear God.

Name: HAHAHaruhi !6mHaRuhies 2008-05-01 4:45

I asked Cudder about it and she said it'd be OK for me to post the essence of the Anonux plan now.

Basically, it's not going to be just another Linux or {insert distro name here}. We have the anoncoreutils right now (development is a bit slow at the moment, but we hope more anons will contribute), and once they're mostly done we'll move onto what GNU calls the binutils (assembler, linker, etc.), resulting in a Anon/GNU/Linux OS. Then, a C compiler, followed by a C library. Once we reach this point and finish off replacing GNU programs with anonymous', we'll have an Anon/Linux system, as opposed to the GNU/Linux around right now.

The final stage of the plan would be the longest and most difficult, a POSIX-compliant replacement kernel. If/when that is complete, Anon/Linux will become Anonux.

This is going to be long-term. Very long-term. We have no set dates at the moment but we plan on finishing anoncoreutils by the end of '08.

More details May 5th.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 4:49

>>37
Faggot, and also weeaboo.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 4:50

>>36
That's sad because people actually find it ``win''.

Name: >>38 2008-05-01 4:51

By the way, has anyone else noticed the correlation between all these tremendous failures of "anon" projects and tripcode users?

In other words, only tripfags call shit "anon", make a big goddamn deal of it, and on top of that, consistently manage to fail miserably.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 4:54

>>36,39
Sounds about right for something that grew out of 7chan

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 5:02

>>40
Well in the case of anoncoreutils the tripfags (HAHAHaruhi,Cudder,w4lolitaKs) only post with their trips to announce something. They post anonymously the rest of the time.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 6:50

>>37
Why the obsession with being an exact clone of GNU/Linux?  That to me is what makes this project unworkable.  A public-domain pure POSIX/SUS implementation is an easier (and more definable) goal.  The problem is that you don't have a spec to point to when someone submits trash code.  And it's unavoidable, because all they can do in the first place is see that "hey it kinda acts like my GNU/Linux install".  And I don't even have a GNU/Linux install.

There are also serious quality-control issues with the automatic acceptance of anonymous code patches (prog.git is especially guilty of this).  Establish some kind of approval process, even if it's just you responding to each patch and rejecting ones that don't meet expectations or provide a tangible improvement.  Eventually you'll need to delegate responsibility to people who understand the details of certain tool domains.

You've pretty much avoided any serious discussion of overarching design issues and technical guidelines.  These things need to be laid out before each individual tool takes its own "whatever's convenient here" approach with the same problems being encountered again and again and in the end none of the code is really even compatible.

Whenever a design question does come up, it really feels like you're just throwing darts at the words on your monitor rather than enlightening us as to the elements of a plan.  Stop doing that.  If you don't know something, start another thread to invite discussion about it.  But however you do it, make sure you come to a conclusion that fits the plan and helps move things forward rather than stagnating and scaring off contributors.

And please stop with the OMG AnonAnon Internet Code Machine Lulz We Gon Take Down GPoLogy hype.  Even if you did build a clone of GNU/Linux, the original is moving much too fast to track.  There are already respectable, long-running OS projects that have a hard time competing with it on things like basic hardware and application support.  What are you going to do differently?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 7:13

>>43
Exactly. I just wish these people contributed to the Minix or Haiku projects. Those projects should be adequately free for anybody and they could definitely use the help.

Name: !w4lolitaKs 2008-05-01 8:05

>>43,44
'sup guys,

We aren't going for another GNU/Linux clone. We're going for POSIX, as you rightly said. The spec is here:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/

Quality control isn't going to be an issue yet, and when it does, we'll be ready to handle whatever it entails. Currently me and three others do the task of looking over the code and updating the local directory on REchan only when it's OK. Everyone else can use the prog.git for development, we'll just keep snapshots of the versions that work.

What are you going to do differently?
The main thing is that all contributions are anonymous and put in the public domain.

You've pretty much avoided any serious discussion of overarching design issues and technical guidelines.
Whenever a design question does come up, it really feels like you're just throwing darts at the words on your monitor rather than enlightening us as to the elements of a plan.

Like HAHAHaruhi said,
More details May 5th.


Also, WAHa detected.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 12:47

scons

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 13:37

I asked Cudder about it and she said it'd be OK for me to post the essence of the Anonux plan now.
I asked Cudder about it and she said
and she said
she


What

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 14:18

>>45
Ok, you say POSIX, but you're still modeling it after GNU and talking about replacing a GNU/Linux system piece by piece with the new code.  Do you see the confusion here?

GNU's NOT UNIX

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 14:23

>>48
POSIX Operating System Interface.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 15:51

HEY GUYS MIT/GNU SCHEME HAS GNU IN IT! PLZ REWRITE IT SO IT CAN HAS BE PUBLIC DOMAN!

Name: HAHAHaruhi !6mHaRuhies 2008-05-01 16:08

>>47
That's right, it's a she.

>>48
We figured it would be best to remain interoperable with Linux, just like *BSD is able to run a lot of Linux binaries. But we won't be using any GNU extensions, only the POSIX functions. Starting from scratch is way too ambitious, even for us.

Also we're considering changing the name to Anonix instead of Anonux since the former is closer to *nix than *ux which was Linus' bastardization.

More details coming May 5th at the REchan.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 16:45

That's right, it's a she.
BITS OR GTFO

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 16:57

>>51
That's right, it's a she.
Interesting. Pictures please.

instead of Anonux since the former is closer to *nix than *ux which was Linus' bastardization
And closer to the ``hacks''. So, yeah, Anonix sounds better.

But I still think it's insane, since anoncoreutils is based in lazyness and dependency on C libraries. And bigger projects will only succeed if an individual starts to write a lot of code.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 23:08

>>53
You forgot to mention that rechan sucks.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-01 23:33

>>54
So does /prog/

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 3:13

>>55,54
Cold front vs. deep space.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 3:38

>>54,55
Cat shit vs. dog shit.

Name: Cudder !MhMRSATORI 2008-05-02 7:11

Pictures please.
No. I'll keep my IRL anonymity.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 7:36

What's the point of an 'Anonymous' Unix system? It really makes no sense.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 7:40

>>47
Post-op transsexual. Probably looks something like http://www.sophie.org.uk/99903003small.jpg

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 7:43

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 7:56

>>60
That looks just like every other female in britfagland...

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 17:22

>>59
It's more "free" than the others out there, so its code can be used whereever others want; and the anonymous part is so no one person/group gets associated with it, so in essence it belongs to all of us.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 17:26

>>63
It's ``free'' in the way that no one will use it due to the problems with copyrights.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 17:29

what problems?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 17:34

>>63
Just use BSD then

Name: >>53 2008-05-02 18:25

>>58
;_;

Also, you have both name and tripcode. That is not anonymous

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 18:30

>>65
Copyrights are associated to names. But, actually, nobody cares about that.

I'd just reject/remove conflictive code.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 19:24

>>68
Nobody cares until they get sued.  Except those who want to avoid getting sued at all.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 19:28

>>67
``IRL Anonymity''

(also known as ``pseudonymity'', but that doesn't make it inherently wrong)

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 19:30

>>69
Since when is it illegal to use public domain software?

Also (since I don't care) legal actions are taken only in ENTERPRISE, not againist individuals.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 19:31

>>70
I don't care about the bullshit shii wrote. I just want cudder pics.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 19:36

>>71
How will a user prove that it's public domain?
"Oh, Your Honor, Anonymous gave it to me.  I'm sure it's legit."

Without any trail of legal authority/ownership, anyone can take the code, claim they wrote it, and sue anyone else using it.  That's a little too much freedom if you ask me.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 19:36

cudder
*grabs dick*

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 19:48

>>73
Ok, we assign the copyright to moot.

No, really, I don't think it's a real reason to stop this insane project. Just don't be like Christopher and don't post screenshots. Also, ``Anyone'' may claim ownership, but you can't sue ``Anonymous'', anyway.

>>74
get out

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 19:57

>>75
So only Anonymous is allowed to use the code?  That will severely limit its acceptance.  Hence, >>64.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 20:31

Without any trail of legal authority/ownership, anyone can take the code, claim they wrote it, and sue anyone else using it.  That's a little too much freedom if you ask me.

They can claim they wrote it, they can try to sue, but how likely is that going to happen? Besides, the original code has no owner -- that's the point of making it anonymous.

>>76
Everyone is. Just like anything else that's in the public domain.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 20:42

I think there's some misunderstanding of what ``public domain'' means, just to troll us. By the way, public domain is not a license, and it's not valid in some countries. The anoncoreutils license should be fine, and does exactly what we need.


Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining this
work (the "Work"), to deal in the Work without restriction, including
without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish,
distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Work, and to permit
persons to whom the Work is furnished to do so.

THE WORK IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE WORK OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN
THE WORK.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 21:07

>>77
You don't understand >>73,76.

>>78
A license from no one is nothing.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-02 21:11

>>79
From moot

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 14:03

Its quite simple, actually.

I routinely post code to the anoncoreutils project (and from what it looks like I'm one of two people doing so) without my leading comment block. The code is just the Coreutils code without comments and with some of the bloat down, then run through indent so that it won't look exactly the same.

After it starts up, I'll notify the FSF that "Anonymous" is attempting to violate the GPL, upon which the GPL dragons will fly free over the lands and destroy all.

These newfags trying to make anonymous posting into some type of religion are cancer. I for one really wish they would just leave and go fap off to their 12-year-old perceptions of freedom on some other gay forum.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 14:17

>>81

What exactly would the GPL dragons be destroying?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 14:58

>>37
I dont think you should "announce" building a whole kernel when you havent even released a mediocre distro O.o

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 15:14

>>83
I don't think you should ``O.o'' when you are ``-_-''.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 15:16


        . . ,.".".'"""..
      .             ,__\.~~
     .    ;'``` '``     \!"
     .   `.              \~"
      .., '  ____________|'~"
     `.  .__/     |_|    |\
      `..'  |  = /  | =  ||
          | \___/   |\___|/
          |        _|    |
           \      __     |
            \    /__\  ./
            |`'._____.'|
           /|          /\
     >>84 is unscientific and
      ultimately destructive

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 15:18

Why the hell are you just remaking all the GNU shit and expecting  it to become Anon/GNU/Linux magically?

Why are you making another fail monolithic kernel?

WHY WHY WHY?
THERE IS NO IMPROVEMENT HERE.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 15:31

>>86
GNU IS NOT FREE ENOUGH!!!

... sorta like how people started GNU when there was already BSD because BSD was ``too free".

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 15:36

>>87

You're a fucking retard.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 15:38

>>88
hax my anus, asshole

*grabs dick*

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 16:04

Why is it YOUR asshole?

That's against the cause; your asshole needs to be freer

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 16:07

Let's not have this debate again. We can all agree that freedom needs to be enforceable.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 16:17

>>89
Are you asking him to hax himself?

Name: HAHAHaruhi !6mHaRuhies 2008-05-03 18:01

>>81
The code is just the Coreutils code without comments and with some of the bloat down
Then it isn't the coreutils' code, because the latter is 100% bloat. Believe me, we'll know when you're submitting copypasta.

BTW, a lot of the Anoncoreutils development is being done IRL. There are 7 working on the project there. We don't release often, we accumulate first.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 20:44

>>93
That is not ``anonymous''. It's just a group of friends that wanted to code an operating system, starting with coreutils.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 22:38

>>94
But what if they release it anonymously?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 23:08

>>95

Then they're idiots.

>>82

GPL dragons destroy everything that isn't free, like non-copyleft free licenses.

>>93

fuqin moron

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-03 23:55

>>95

Rampant namefaggotry means you aren't doing it anonymously 

You want to be known as Anon of Anon CoreUtils, slayer of the fascist GPL daemon

And it's gonna fail
Real hard.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:20

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:23

>>98
Still no pics. But I suspect there's someone trolling me here.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:24

100GET, and i'm OP

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:24

>>93
Believe me, we'll know when you're submitting copypasta.
Ah, so you've read the coreutils.  Which means you're violating GPL intentionally.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:28

>>101
Wrong. Merely getting ideas from reading GPLd code does not mean that your implementation is a derivative of that code. It is your own implementation.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:32

>>102
Whatever, tainted one.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:34

>>102
GPL is so viral that you can't read GPL'd code if you have ever coded in some other license, or plan to do so, because you may reimplement the *same* sources you read somewhere else and relicense it, violating the terms. In other words, YHBT

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:36

>>101-104
whatever, fuck the GPL, it's not as if they can go after -- oh wait, the authors are anonymous.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:43

>>104
Then why am I allowed to write, publish and hold copyright on a story about a boy wizard that was (until recently), oppressed by his guardian. This boy wizard finds out about his heritage and subsequently joins a school of witchcraft and wizardry. It is not the idea that is copyrightable but the implementation of that idea.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 0:47

>>104
What's the best way to write a program that simply returns 0?

there are things that can only be done sensibly in one way, and GNU's coreutils tend to go overboard with it (i.e. not the simplest way), so if anoncoreutils were to "steal" the coreutils code it would be pretty damn obvious.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 4:47

What's the best way to write a program that simply returns 0?
main=12828721;

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 5:19

>>108
Save that one for the i386 version. I meant portably.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 8:50

if anoncoreutils were to "steal" the coreutils code it would be pretty damn obvious
Who cares? Anon can steal, copy or crack whatever software he wants. Why do we have /t/ and /rs/ in the first place? It's not like we have a name or anything.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 8:55

steal copy crack /t/ /rs/
*grabs dick*

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-04 14:18

>>110
BRBFBI, etc.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-06 6:14

It faster easier on   a larger scale   and with fewer   defects than ever   before You faggots   fail Being C   fags and Gentoo   ricers all day   LULZ AM I   going to forget   is how you   got into programming   bought a book   AIMED AT 1ST   YEAR UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS   WITH NO PROGRAMMING.

Name: Sgt.Kabukiman쿠 2012-05-23 4:32

ԅꄭ埧끢鲭⨇鮵㽬

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List