raisama.net

Para não dizer que não falei da Paçoca

Que graça tem dar parabéns sobre algo só porque todo mundo tá dando parabéns? É muito mais legal fazer isso no dia seguinte. 8)

Parabéns à Paçoca, por me suportar.

E parabéns às outras mulheres também, por aguentarem os homens à sua volta.

Another rant about a development tool: guess who?

Actually it is not a single tool, but a set of tools. I am talking about autotools again.

I wanted to build konversation from svn. I did the following:

• First, checkout extragear/network/konversation from KDE svn: svn co svn://anonsvn.kde.org/home/kde/trunk/extragear/network/konversation
• Enter the konversation directory: cd konversation
• Get the kde-common/admin directory for the buildsystem: svn co svn://anonsvn.kde.org/home/kde/trunk/KDE/kde-common/admin
• Run the cvs.sh script for the KDE buildsystem: sh admin/cvs.sh cvs

What I get is:

$ sh admin/cvs.sh cvs
*** YOU'RE USING UNSERMAKE 0.4.
*** Creating acinclude.m4
*** Creating list of subdirectories
*** Creating configure.files
*** Creating configure.in
*** Creating aclocal.m4
configure.in:8: error: m4_defn: undefined macro: _m4_divert_diversion
acinclude.m4:4532: KDE_CHECK_HEADER is expanded from...
configure.in:8: the top level
autom4te-2.5x: /usr/bin/m4 failed with exit status: 1
aclocal: /usr/bin/autom4te failed with exit status: 1

“undefined macro: _m4divertdiversion“. What kind of error message is that?

This is why I don’t like autotools: how is someone supposed to know where the real problem is, from this message? It is impossible to tell what is wrong from this message, unless you have written autoconf yourself.

Yes, I did something very wrong above, regarding the KDE buildsystem. I will see if someone is able to tell where the real problem was. But the rant is about the non-intuitive error message I was getting. I took days to find out what I was doing wrong.

Too much noise

Sorry for people that want to see more interesting content on this page, but I had to comment about this.

Now that lilo has commented on it, I think I should explain some things about my my last post.

First of all: lilo talked to me, and we friendly discussed the issue, and exchanged opinions about the event.

And, yes, I think my text had too much repercussion and I was thinking about removing the post from my blog. But I don’t like the idea of removing stuff that I already made online. I think it wouldn’t be fair with people that read this and wanted to argue with me. I would feel like a coward if I removed a text I’ve already written and published.

But just to conclude:

• I agree that the guy deserved the ban
• I am not against punishing people for “anti-social” behaviour on a IRC network
• I am not the kind of people that thinks IRC should have “total free speech”, and people allowed to say anything they want in a channel

The only reason for my post were:

• Yes, I think that the person in question wouldn’t be punished if he had offended any other non-staffer people
• Yes, I think that the punishment was too much because: a total network ban wasn’t necessary IMHO; and it wouldn’t happen if the problem happened with other people (you can say “yes, that it would happen”, but I don’t believe so)
• Finally the main reason for the post was: I was really disappointed with the network staffer saying many times that “this is not open to discussion”. This was even why I have posted my complaints publicly instead of discussing it with the network staffers: if he really didn’t want to discuss, I had the desire to make my complaints public.

Probably the reason I think the punishment was “too much” is related to the lack of portuguese-speaking staffers in the network. This may be one of the reasons I think that an offense wouldn’t have the same consequences if a staffer wasn’t involved: there aren’t enough portuguese-speaking staffers to guarantee this.

Okay, I will not say any word about it, anymore. It is over and I still think the freenode services are good.