Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > Re: dh, the daemon helper

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: dh, the daemon helper

 
 
John Kelly
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 03:11:33 +0300, Giorgos Keramidas
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>There's already daemon( in the BSDs and it is a 10 minute task to
>'port' it to non-BSD systems by wrapping a tiny autoconf script around
>the daemon(3) function and a local `libcompat/daemon.c' copy.


>I really don't see why one would like to reinvent the particular wheel


An artist creates what he wants. Undesirable prior art is irrelevant
for copyright purposes. I wrote dh from scratch and gave it an Apache
license.

Perhaps that disturbs certain GPL adherents. I have observed Debian
advocates demonstrating fanatical zeal for it.

Invading the two character namespace with a distro tool like debhelper
was poor judgement. It should be self evident that distro tools need
longer names. If Ubuntu uses debhelper, they may rename it for brand
identity and consistency. Debian is not important. Their mistake does
not hinder my work.

The daemon helper. dh is its name. It starts any program or script as
a daemon. It's not an environment like daemontools or launchd. It's a
configuration free utility with a short two character name, easy to use
interactively or in init scripts.

Be careful though. It has been known to bring demon possessed lunatics
screaming from their haunt among the tombs.

ftp://ftp.isp2dial.com/users/jak/src/dh/


--
Webmail for Dialup Users
http://www.isp2dial.com/freeaccounts.html

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Seebs
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
On 2009-10-24, John Kelly <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Perhaps that disturbs certain GPL adherents. I have observed Debian
> advocates demonstrating fanatical zeal for it.


No, you haven't. You've noticed people who'd been using a name across
millions of users for a decade suggesting that maybe your choice was
poor.

> Invading the two character namespace with a distro tool like debhelper
> was poor judgement. It should be self evident that distro tools need
> longer names.


Perhaps so... But then idiosyncratic tools for single users need longer
names if they want anyone else to use them. (I maintain a utility for
my own use with a single-character name, and one with a two-character
name, but I don't expect anyone else to adopt them.)

> If Ubuntu uses debhelper, they may rename it for brand
> identity and consistency.


This is a non-sequitur, and in any event, they also may not. Which they
didn't, because consistency of usage is important.

> Debian is not important.


They are more important than you are -- and as long as you have this attitude,
more important than you could ever possibly be.

> Their mistake does not hinder my work.


True that!

What hinders your work is that you don't understand the problem space,
you spam, you're narcissistic, you ignore substantive criticism, you've
reinvented the wheel, poorly, and you have no possible hope of ever
developing decent software as long as you're committed to reacting to
substantive criticism with defensiveness.

> It starts any program or script as a daemon.


Badly.

That's sort of the point.

> It's not an environment like daemontools or launchd.


Making it less flexible, but...

> It's a
> configuration free utility with a short two character name, easy to use
> interactively or in init scripts.


And this is where the whole thing breaks down. This task is simply not
frequent enough to need a short name -- that's why the most popular existing
program in this field is named 'daemon'. That's a much better name; you
can tell by seeing the name what the program does, and yet, it's not long
enough to take noticeable time to type it as often as you're ever going
to use it.

> Be careful though. It has been known to bring demon possessed lunatics
> screaming from their haunt among the tombs.


More importantly, it's crap. A program of this sort should not have needed
multiple passes to fix trivial and obvious security flaws, and it's still
incompatible with basic UNIX idioms. I genuinely doubt that this program
will ever be of use to any other person.

It's still spam, too, same as it was the first time you announced it to awk,
Ruby, and C users. You're not discussing C; you're jacking off publically.
Knock it off.

-s
--
Copyright 2009, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Seebs <(E-Mail Removed)> bloviated:
....

I just have one question for you, Peter Seebach, fairly well recognized
"name" in these sorts of circles (see below for why I'm weasling a bit
on this), and that is this: Why do you care? Why are you expending so
much effort belittling John and his efforts - and making yourself look
like a lunatic in the process? Again, if John is as inconsequential as
you'd have us all believe, why bother? Why make yourself look like an
idiot?

Note: I had thought, when I first started composing this response in my
head, that you were a fairly "big" name - that you had published books
(real books, not the kind of crap such as that with which our friend Dicky
Heathfield has been associated) and were pretty well known. But
then I checked your page on "linkedin" and wasn't all that impressed, so
maybe I shouldn't be all that surpised that you're wasting your time
here.

Mind you, you seem to be a bigger man than I (heck, all I ever do is get
killed every week on South Park), so don't go taking the above as an
insult. But still, based on your "linkedin" profile, I still gotta
wonder why you are wasting your time here.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Giorgos Keramidas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:26:09 +0000 (UTC),
(E-Mail Removed) (Kenny McCormack) wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Seebs <(E-Mail Removed)> bloviated:
> ...
> I just have one question for you, Peter Seebach, ...
> Note: I had thought, when I first started composing this response in
> my head, that you were a fairly "big" name - that you had published
> books (real books, not the kind of crap such as that with which our
> friend Dicky Heathfield has been associated) and were pretty well
> known. But then I checked your page on "linkedin" and wasn't all that
> impressed, so maybe I shouldn't be all that surpised that you're
> wasting your time here.


You got one thing right: that Mr. Seebach is a fairly big name. He has
written many tutorials, articles, and other documentation material. He
worked for two important companies in the UNIX world: BSDi and Wind
River Systems. His technical experience apparently spans more than 20
years of UNIX programming, writing and evangelizing. There are not
_many_ people who have this sort of experience with UNIX and C who still
find the time and the will to communicate over Usenet with the rest of
us mere mortals.

What you got wrong is looking at a single place and generalizing from
what you found there. It is hardly a good idea to look at a single
"linkedin profile" and try to extrapolate how good, knowledgeable or
famous a person is. You could have spent 2 minutes to search in some of
the search engines we have today, and that would still be a fairly
inadequate measure of a real person's value. You would still have to
use some sort of heuristics to guesstimate some of the details. Even
then, you would know only what search engines can provide and what your
intuition can surmise from this inherently limited amount of information.

So limited information, in fact, that it seems --to put it very mildly--
a bit of a stretch to assume one is "wasting one's time" by posting the
sort of writings I've seen here from Seebs.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Seebs
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
On 2009-10-24, Kenny McCormack <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I just have one question for you, Peter Seebach, fairly well recognized
> "name" in these sorts of circles (see below for why I'm weasling a bit
> on this), and that is this: Why do you care?


Good question!

A few reasons. One is that I really do care about newsgroup topics; I think
they make Usenet viable. Another is that, every so often, when you talk to
someone, they listen. It's *probably* not going to happen, but maybe it
will.

> Why are you expending so
> much effort belittling John and his efforts


Even if he can't learn, maybe others can. These criticisms get close to
the heart of what makes the difference between a one-user-only utility and
something that could potentially be valuable to other people.

> - and making yourself look like a lunatic in the process?


If you think I care how I look, you are very much mistaken.

> Again, if John is as inconsequential as
> you'd have us all believe, why bother?


See above.

> Why make yourself look like an idiot?


Why not?

> Note: I had thought, when I first started composing this response in my
> head, that you were a fairly "big" name - that you had published books
> (real books, not the kind of crap such as that with which our friend Dicky
> Heathfield has been associated) and were pretty well known.


Well, I've published a book that was actually my work (though a great deal
of the credit has to go to the technical reviewer), but nothing huge.

But... I think I see the problem. See, you're framing this in terms of
status. (I wouldn't have known this a couple of weeks ago, but I had some
really interesting conversations on the topic recently.) I'm not. I don't
really understand status; I sort of know how to define the term, and sometimes
I can recognize when people are talking about it, but for the most part, it's
not real to me and I don't care about it.

> But then I checked your page on "linkedin" and wasn't all that impressed, so
> maybe I shouldn't be all that surpised that you're wasting your time
> here.


.... And I should care whether you're impressed why, exactly?

> Mind you, you seem to be a bigger man than I (heck, all I ever do is get
> killed every week on South Park), so don't go taking the above as an
> insult. But still, based on your "linkedin" profile, I still gotta
> wonder why you are wasting your time here.


Because I enjoy Usenet, and like to post things that I think might help people
learn stuff. Or which might lead to people helping me learn stuff.

This is why, for instance, I respond to obvious trolls. You think I have
problems, look at yourself; you sit around posting blatant trolls, trying
to pick offensive nicknames for people to get a rise out of them. Why
bother? What good will it do? There is no possible future in which someone
reading your posts comes to an insight which makes them better or more
fulfilled. It's not as though you actually believe this ****.

At least I'm arguing for positions I think are true. Maybe it makes me look
good, maybe it makes me look bad. What do I care? The people I'm most
interested in trying to communicate with -- those who are most likely to
gain value from reading Usenet -- aren't looking at how things make people
look, they're reading posts on their own merits, for content.

You remind me a lot of someone I recently had some fascinating arguments
with, who was furious and outraged because of status imbalances -- a perceived
"in-group" getting special treatment. And yet, ultimately, the real problem
isn't any kind of special treatment; it's that people who are ranting about
the "in-group" rather than posting substantive, topical, material always
end up being ignored more often, because no one cares.

Stop trying to think about status, and start trying to think about the real
world, and you'll go far.

-s
--
Copyright 2009, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / (E-Mail Removed)
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
 
Reply With Quote
 
John Kelly
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:26:09 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed)
(Kenny McCormack) wrote:

>I just have one question for you, Peter Seebach, fairly well recognized
>"name" in these sorts of circles (see below for why I'm weasling a bit
>on this), and that is this: Why do you care? Why are you expending so
>much effort belittling John and his efforts - and making yourself look
>like a lunatic in the process? Again, if John is as inconsequential as
>you'd have us all believe, why bother? Why make yourself look like an
>idiot?


I think dh is cool, but whether anyone else likes it or not, I had fun
writing it. Peter may be smart. But life is too short for me to spend
time listening to mean people. I don't let them steal my joy.


--
Webmail for Dialup Users
http://www.isp2dial.com/freeaccounts.html

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Giorgos Keramidas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:26:09 +0000 (UTC),
>(E-Mail Removed) (Kenny McCormack) wrote:
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> Seebs <(E-Mail Removed)> bloviated:
>> ...
>> I just have one question for you, Peter Seebach, ...
>> Note: I had thought, when I first started composing this response in
>> my head, that you were a fairly "big" name - that you had published
>> books (real books, not the kind of crap such as that with which our
>> friend Dicky Heathfield has been associated) and were pretty well
>> known. But then I checked your page on "linkedin" and wasn't all that
>> impressed, so maybe I shouldn't be all that surpised that you're
>> wasting your time here.

>
>You got one thing right: that Mr. Seebach is a fairly big name. He has
>written many tutorials, articles, and other documentation material. He
>worked for two important companies in the UNIX world: BSDi and Wind
>River Systems. His technical experience apparently spans more than 20
>years of UNIX programming, writing and evangelizing. There are not
>_many_ people who have this sort of experience with UNIX and C who still
>find the time and the will to communicate over Usenet with the rest of
>us mere mortals.


You do understand, I assume, that you are making my case for me.

I wasn't quite sure how big of a name PS was, and was trying to give him
the benefit of the doubt. I.e., the more he's just an insignificant
schmuck like the rest of us, the more reasonable it is that he posts
nonsense on Usenet. And particularly on a long-forgotten and meaningless
group like comp.lang.c. Forgotten, except for the comedic value, of
course. And you have to be bent a certain way to benefit from that
comedic content.

Conversely, the more he is a big name, he more ludicrous it looks to see
him ranting and raving here.

P.S. To Peter (responding to his most recent post back to me). Yes, you
are right. I am framing this in terms of status. Alas, as much as you
might like to deny it, the world does run on status. That *is* the real
world.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
John Kelly <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:26:09 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed)
>(Kenny McCormack) wrote:
>
>>I just have one question for you, Peter Seebach, fairly well recognized
>>"name" in these sorts of circles (see below for why I'm weasling a bit
>>on this), and that is this: Why do you care? Why are you expending so
>>much effort belittling John and his efforts - and making yourself look
>>like a lunatic in the process? Again, if John is as inconsequential as
>>you'd have us all believe, why bother? Why make yourself look like an
>>idiot?

>
>I think dh is cool, but whether anyone else likes it or not, I had fun
>writing it. Peter may be smart. But life is too short for me to spend
>time listening to mean people. I don't let them steal my joy.


Agreed. I don't know how old Peter is, but age does figure into it as well.

The personna that he is projecting (*) would be attractive if he was in
the 17-24 range. But much beyond that, it just doesn't look right.

(*) That is, smart (in fact, very smart), but lacking in any kind of
real-world perspective.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Seebs
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
On 2009-10-24, Kenny McCormack <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> P.S. To Peter (responding to his most recent post back to me). Yes, you
> are right. I am framing this in terms of status.


Well, there's your problem.

> Alas, as much as you
> might like to deny it, the world does run on status. That *is* the real
> world.


There, however, you're wrong.

The world is certainly influenced by status... Because people tend to care
about it, because they have instincts along those lines.

That doesn't mean that all perception of status is real, nor does it mean
that choices motivated by a desire for status are good choices. In fact,
consistently, it turns out that making decisions based on status is harmful.
Whether you're mistakenly evaluating things based on perceived status rather
than their underlying truthfulness, or trying to achieve status rather
than doing things which are otherwise useful, it's crazy either way.

You go ahead and worship celebreties while children starve. That can be
the "real world" to you. Me, I'm going to recognize that the brain is full
of instincts which are sometimes wrong, and try to do what's most rational
whether or not it appeals to a forty-thousand-year old set of heuristics.
(Of course, easy for me to say; I haven't got the instincts in question
anyway.)

-s
--
Copyright 2009, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / (E-Mail Removed)
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
 
Reply With Quote
 
Seebs
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2009
On 2009-10-24, John Kelly <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I think my badly-named "daemon helper" is cool, but whether anyone else
> likes it or not, I had fun writing it.


Great attitude to have! (No sarcasm there.)

If you were to approach it from that attitude, rather than pretending that
it was intended to be of use to other people, that'd be fine, and no one
would complain.

The problem is that you spam about your utility, and claim that your
half-baked reinvention of software we had written properly fifteen years
ago is more important than a couple of the largest user bases in the
*nix world. That's where it becomes a problem.

> Peter may be smart. But life is too short for me to spend
> time listening to mean people.


If you think I'm mean, you have missed a key point.

> I don't let them steal my joy.


That's great, but when your "joy" comes only from lying to yourself and
others, you have no joy to steal.

Try learning things, and thinking about how to interact in a constructive
manner with other people, and you'll find that there's a lot more joy to
be had. Any time you have to start handwaving and saying that millions
of users are unimportant, because if they were important, you'd have to
give up a half-baked decision you made a couple of months ago, you have
gone off the rails.

Reality: The name "dh" is a shitty name for your program, your program
is in its current form unlikely to be of any use to any person but you,
and you will not learn the satisfaction of actually contributing to the
world until you're able to accept this, react appropriately, and move on.

-s
--
Copyright 2009, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / (E-Mail Removed)
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
dh, the daemon helper John Kelly C Programming 45 10-09-2009 11:37 AM
dh, the daemon helper 2009-09-11 John Kelly C Programming 3 09-14-2009 08:00 AM
ANN: dh, the daemon helper John Kelly Python 2 09-10-2009 06:57 PM
Re: dh, the daemon helper vippstar@gmail.com C Programming 5 11-03-2008 10:35 AM
What's the purpose of the helper cache and is there a way to just turn off helper cache-ing? kevin Ruby 1 07-21-2006 03:42 AM



Advertisments