And there it is. We now can have Planet Debian in other languages than english. The first one is Spanish but the framework allows for any number. In case you do want to have Planet Debian in a different language, follow this steps: (2LETTER means the 2char ISO Code of your language. Like es for the spanish one, de for a german, etc.)

• Checkout svn://svn.debian.org/planet-debian/trunk/config and look at the config.ini.tmpl
• Rename it to config.ini.$2LETTER
• Edit the values in it that are marked to be edited. Feel free to translate the footext variables, they are used in the html template.
• Send this file to the Debian Planet Maintainers. No need to commit yet, it wont get automatically activated, we do have to take two steps on the host planet runs on before that happens.

You need to have 10 feeds ready and filled in in the file you send us. All the feeds should provide a category that has entries with only the language for this new instance. (Otherwise it won t make sense to create a Planet instance for a language ) Planet now features a link section called Planet I18N right above the Subscriptions. That will always list the currently active other language Planets. The various planets share the common files like CSS, graphics and all the hackergotchis.

---

It was a bit of work to get to the point where we are able to add multiple planets to the system. First I had to upgrade the code behind it to a newer one, Planet Venus instead of Planet Planet. Main advantage being that it uses multi-threading to fetch the feeds, greatly speeding up that part. And this weekend I had to rewrite all the templates, going away from old (and simple) htmltmpl format to one based on Django. Htmltmpl simply has no way to deal with our Planet now anymore, especially as it has no way to access all config file values. Which I need for the translated strings, or I would need one template per language. Which would be insane. Various other things in Django also make Django templates a way easier thing to deal with, for example simply saying

  % firstof var1 var2 var3 "nothing" % 

instead of having a huge if-then-elsif-elsif-lalala chain. And we do have that multiple times.

Sticking with the theme that blogs are all about completely biased and probably controversial opinion and not much else, I'm glad that Thomas has made his thoughts clear. Thomas - I fully agree (but your blog doesn't support comments, so I'm putting it here).

Debian, to me, needs to about Quality over quantity (being very aggressive over orphaned packages and their reverse dependencies) and about everyone working towards the releases. Not to pick arbitrary time-based deadlines for releases but actively fixing release-critical bugs, so that the release can proceed smoothly with stable, reliable packages. Debian developers who feel unable to fix release critical bugs maybe should not be developers any more - or at least be banned from mailing lists on lists.debian.org which appear to be the only "contribution" being made.

There's no reason to continue using Gtk1.2 and no point in complaining about it because there is no prospect of anyone stepping up to maintain gtk1.2 itself. There is therefore no point in the long threads complaining about removing gtk1.2 because nobody is going to do any work to retain gtk1.2.

If you aren't prepared to do the work, you should not feel you have any rights to complain about the lack of such work being done. We're all volunteers - don't expect someone else to sift the wheat from the chaff, get rid of your own cruft. Debian needs to be an association of people who do, not the current association of people who complain, moan and generally fight amongst themselves. The answer to this negativity is a can-do attitude - it is not as if there aren't enough problems out there to fix, get out there and raise the quality. (First though, get Lenny released.)

Not everyone can do the same amount of workload but within the work that you are able to do, there must be a balance between the work you do for yourself and the work you do for the distribution. I'm not expecting people to have to match my levels of output, I am expecting people to match the proportion of time that they allocate to fixing problems outside their own limited niche. If that proportion approaches zero then maybe Debian doesn't need you any more.

There is no reason to have project members who do not contribute to either quality or releases - that doesn't just mean not fixing bugs, it means not being a part of any team or other group in Debian that provides support for general quality or the release.

If you aren't fussed about the quality of packages (in general, not just your own) and aren't willing to contribute just a small amount of your time to use your privileges to fix release-critical issues, then those privileges should be removed - you obviously don't need them. (Also, if you aren't a DD yet and you want sponsorship, these rules apply to you too. I won't sponsor people who have no feel for quality or want to help Debian make releases. I'm beginning to wish other sponsors would do the same. Quality is far more important than quantity - merely adding packages because they exist and because someone posts a request for a sponsor is insufficient. Completely insufficient, counter-productive too. See my sponsorship requirements.)

Note: this post is entirely opinionated and I don't care if you disagree. I will take a particularly brutal approach to comments that do not grasp this fact.

David, I m not saying it lightly: the end goal is censorship, no matter how nicely you try to put it. The goal is to discourage people from posting. They call it peer pressure , which is nothing else but the politically correct equivalent expression for intimidation . The end result is censorship. The idea of censoring the mailing lists has actually been mentioned very clearly in the recent discussions on -devel, and I never thought it would go past that, but it s actually happening. By the way, this could actually morph into a shitty karma system that wouldn t let you post past your monthly allowance and credit earned . How s that for you? You refer to those +1/-1 mails; I find them silly, annoying, useless and a waste of bandwidth and CPU time. That used to be called a me too and generally despised and frowned upon. If you actually want to score posts or posters, get a decent MUA and set up its scoring system the way you like. But keep that to yourself. As Aigars told, there are mail to web forum gateways (more like rendering engines for a mail archive, actually) that will present mails to a list in a crappy web forum of some sort that will come with all kind of crap like scoring, karma and whatever. There s an essential difference between web forums and our mailing lists, though: forums of this kind use nicknames all over the place, our mailing lists use real names. There are privacy issues involved, and I m not giving up on that, either. You want to stop flamewars? Stop replying, especially to tell how intolerable it is and other shit. Just let the damn thing die already. Funny how the well-meaning people are feeling harassed on the mailing lists when they, themselves, are harassing people they disagree with. We don t all have the same views, culture etc. We re not all friends, and we probably never will be. Guess what? It s OK! Get over it and work with each other, because that is what we are here for. If you (general) can t get over it, I m afraid this Project is not the appropriate place for you. Imposing a monoculture of politically correct crap is not an answer to the perceived problems .

Seriously. It reads more like a worked example, without enough of the underlying theory. It doesn't help that I have a slightly more complicated situation, in that I have a filesystem on a logical volume that spans 6 physical volumes. So maybe writing all of this down will help... I know the disk with the problem: /dev/sdc I know the LBA of the sector where the rot starts: 754238963 I know that the physical volume is on /dev/sdc1 and that the partition starts at sector 63 (via sfdisk -luS /dev/sdc) Therefore, within /dev/sdc1, we're talking about block number 754238899 (754238963 - 64) I know the physical extent size is 4096 Kb (via pvdisplay -c /dev/sdc1 awk -F: ' print $8 '). In LBA block size this becomes 8192 (2 x 4096) I know the physical extents start 192K (into the partition, presumably) (via pvs -o+pe_start /dev/sdc1) This is where the Bad block HOWTO starts to quicken the pace a bit on me... I'm supposed to take the physical partition's bad block number (754238899) and divide it by the size of the physical extent (in LBA block size) (8192). So that'd be 92070. This is where I think I end up completely departing the HOWTO, because my filesystem spans multiple physical volumes. Here's my general musings... lvdisplay --maps /dev/data/srv tells me this about /dev/sdc1:

  Logical extent 272326 to 391559:
    Type                linear
    Physical volume     /dev/sdc1
    Physical extents    0 to 119233

So I'm inferring from this, given that I know I want physical extent 92070 of this device, that this corresponds to logical extent 92103 (again, I'm expressing this in LBA block size, so that's (272326 / 8192) + 92070 So now I supposedly know the logical extent (in LBA size) of the bad block. Now what? I think I'm wandering up too many layers, closer to the physical filesystem, but I'll continue wandering around... So presumably at this point, I just want to convert the logical extent to an actual filesystem block number. Maybe the logical extent number divided by the extent filesystem block size divided by the LBA block size? 92070 / (4096 / 512) = 11508. That feels awfully low though. The dd test suggests this is incorrect. At this point I'm feeling fairly lost. If someone out there is reading this, and they've done this before, I'd love to hear from you.

Since they beat me to it and I am swamped with stuff/errands/cleaning/grading/everything else, here is the audio from Anon s great visit to my class on Dec 8th. I will throw up a copy on my server tonight as well. Warning: Not lots but in fact tons of expletives.

Just saw the LF announcement:

http://video.linuxfoundation.org/category/video-category/-linux-foundation-video-contest

I love the effort, and I'm sure people will do great work, but there's a problem here. There needs to be *two* contests. The first, with the award that they propose, should be the serious one - The one that might get rolled out to suits and businesses everywhere, that we'd be proud to show off on our corporate web sites.

Then there's the second category. The "too honest" ones that get made for the equivalent "I'm a Mac" / "I'm a PC" ads and wind up on YouTube and email attachments. Not so much fan fiction as fan honesty. =)

I'm thinking start with a focus on a keyboard, crusted with Doritos and possibly an ashtray beside it, zoom out to a couple people playing Quake or Tetrinet or something that clearly haven't washed in days, zoom out, show that this is a dorm room. The room next to it (with cutaway walls and what not) has someone composing an email saying that either Gnome or KDE sux0rs. Further out, two floors, more rooms: Some people lit just by the glow of a CRT, decorated by Debian and Gentoo logos, maybe a vague outline of some porn on a monitor. The zoom out picks up to show ESR writing another book, maybe another ELER comic being written, someone "upgrading" their home wiring, various people arguing, one shower in the building total, and finish the zoom out and fade in the facade to the building: All shiny, glass and steel with a front door with a business person leading a tour past it saying "These are the Linux Development Labs, where all the magic happens. It's closed to visitors right now (points to goth in the back with a laptop who's probably running kismet), except you - you're welcome in." And then fade in the letters "We are Linux"

The soundtrack to this should be a background hum, just at the edge of what a TV speaker will play for volume. Queue in fifths and octaves during the zoom out, fade in some drum and base, some Simcity type of background talking and open up the chord as the words fade onto the screen.

(This is fiction, people. Noone expects another ELER)

(Inaugurating a new category which will be kind of my own dailty wtf) A pretty well known matter is how some tools can be abused. Usually, it is cat or grep. Typical examples include the following two:

cat foo grep bar

grep bar foo awk ' print $2 '

Obviously, the first one can be reduced to:

grep bar foo

and the second, to:

awk '/bar/ print $2 ' foo

awk and sed are often part of the reason grep gets abused, because a lot of people don t know the latter form above or its sed equivalent. They don t know they could restrict the match on a specific column, too, which could be important in some cases. Anyways, a few months ago, I saw the most beautiful short piece of combined useless use of something I ve ever seen, which also happens to be a pretty unusual type:

more $file wc awk ' print $1 '

Not only does it use more where even cat, while still being useless, would be a better choice, but it also manages to use awk where wc could take an option to achieve the same goal. Yes, the above can be simplified as:

wc -l < $file

We never found who was responsible for this nicety.

Samba in unstable is 3.2.5 currently, while upstream published 3.2.6 a few days ago. This is mostly because 3.2.6 has too many changes that make it unsuitable for lenny, which will have 3.2.5. As we want to keep the "update through unstable" path, we can't upload 3.2.6 to unstable. Simultaneously, we are using experimental for 3.3.* releases. Upstream recently published 3.3.0-rc2 which I uploaded yesterday to experimental. So, we don't have any easy way to make post-3.2.5 releases available to our users. I briefly imagined using backports.org for this, but:

• there is no lenny-backports distribution there
• it is meants for packages backported from unstable versions

Finally, I opened http://pkg-samba.alioth.debian.org/packages/ as a private repository to hold these packages. You can use the following in sources.list:

deb http://pkg-samba.alioth.debian.org/packages/ ./
deb-src http://pkg-samba.alioth.debian.org/packages/ ./

The packages are signed with my own GPG key, which you need to add to "trusted" keys for APT" (be sure to read http://wiki.debian.org/SecureApt first). They are numbered the same way they would be if they were on backports.org. These packages are maintained in the Samba packaging team SVN. Please take this as a commitment to try providing up-to-date packages for lenny during its release cycle. Of course, the security support will be done on a best effort basis but should at least not be worse than upstream's (which is known to be good and very reactive). I hope that samba users will enjoy....and if some of you could join the team and help triaging bugs, that would be appreciated..:-)

Two policy issues have been brewing in debian and I ve been mostly quiet about them because I ve been busy with TTLLP work. One is the Lenny release GR which I m still trying to make sense of. I mean: yikes! I ve been reading debian-legal and -vote for years and this ballot confuses me. I think I ll vote 5324671 but I m really not sure what that means. The other big issue is that Manoj has resigned as secretary. I think this is a good thing, if for no other reason than he s been secretary for 7 years and I feel it s not healthy for one person to hold that post too long in a thousand-strong group. I ve disagreed with Manoj about some tasks, but I didn t see any point in making this difficult job even less fun, so I stopped criticising him a while ago. Since then, my comments on the secretary s work have usually been limited to small review comments on ballots (which are then apparently ignored anyway, but at least I offer help). I m apprehensive about who will replace Manoj. In the short term, Bdale Garbee acts as secretary, but surely Bdale is busy enough already? Given his increased vote-taking activity, Neil McGovern seems a likely choice, but the work left undone after his term as SPI secretary may count against him. More generally, I think there s a problem with Debian s secretary, so anyone who would be a good secretary would probably refuse to do it as currently defined. There s an email about bundled votes and the secretary by Steve Langasek which touches on this major problem:

the secretary is the *only* line of defense against gaming of the GR process by a small group of developers who propose an uncontroversial but orthogonal amendment that will always win over the alternatives, in the process preventing the will of the project from being formally enacted

In other words, in Debian, the secretary is both secretary (usually an appointed or consensual post in most organisations, in my experience) and chairman (usually an elected post) - both doing the hard administrative leg-work and actually ruling on contentious issues, rather than just giving an opinion to the chairman. Manoj commented that he would be happy if the constitution was changed, to clarify the issue, or to explicitly add another entity to handle intepretations . Is it time to split the secretary s role?

This morning, Alan sends me the link to the subscription form. We are now ready to accept participants for OCaml Meeting 2009. Last week, I was at the annual CAML consortium meeting. We talked about OCaml Meeting with M. Leroy and other participants. Most of us, think this meeting is a real great way to make OCaml user meet. This can be the start of great projects, just because people realized that a real OCaml community exists. The INRIA seems really enthusiast about the meeting, maybe INRIA team will be directly involved in the organization in 2010. I hope 2009 meeting will be as good as the former. At least this year, we are doing things quite in advance and the whole organization will be a little bit more "professional". OCaml Meeting webpage

It looks like I messed up few things in yesterday Gammu release so here is hot fix version. Changelog is quite small and fixes all regressions found so far:

• Fix model name parsing.
• Fix reading of IrMC phonebook.
• Fix visibility of HAVESTRUCTTMTMZONE in header files.
• Increase some timeouts in OBEX driver.
• Fix compilation on s390.

You can download from usual place: http://cihar.com/gammu/, Binary packages will be available soon on all usual places (Debian Unstable, OpenSuse build service, Ubuntu PPA repository).

Taking on from Wouter's post on metablogging, I can only say that official sounding blogs are very off-putting and I stop reading them very quickly. If a blog (or more typically the blogger) starts thinking too much of their blog, considering it an enduring reference or a permanent piece of documentation then that blogger is deluded. A typical sign of such a blog is a long list of references at the end and topics that try to stipulate how other people should blog.

To me a blog is merely the opinion of the blogger. I do use my blog for announcements but only when the subject matter isn't finalised and / or isn't ready for widespread usage outside a limited list of developers. Where things are more certain, I use mailing lists and if things are just records of what happened at a particular event, I'll use the News parts of websites. As for the time taken to write a blog entry - as short as possible - like this one. Gotta go....

Ciar n O'Riodan blogs about how to blog, and his post is a good read. Most of it is solid advice, and I find there's little I disagree with; if you want to get a blog that's well-read by many people, then his advice is probably sound. So why am I posting this in my 'retorts' category? Because I feel that blogging isn't something that should be taken too seriously. A blog is an outlet, a place to get your thoughts out; it is a bit of a combination between a column and the readers' letters section in a newspaper. The writing style of a blog should reflect that; when I write a blog post, I don't care about what the truth is, I only care about my opinion. If I want to write the truth, I'll write a wikipedia article. If I want to read about the truth, I'll go and kill myself because I'm not naive enough to think something like "the truth" exists in this life. And if I want to read a magazine-style article, how about I'll go buy a magazine instead of reading a blog post? A blog post doesn't require references (beyond, perhaps, what you're replying to); a blog is a reference, one to the personal opinion of the author. If you think something is great, then as far as your blog is concerned, that something may be the best thing since sliced bread. If you think something is ugly, crap, and should be forgotten about, then on your blog it is. In more than one sense, blogs are like opinions: everybody has one. That doesn't mean I disagree with most of what Ciar n wrote; on the contrary. Points 1 through 3, and 6 through 10, will help you develop a good writing style. I couldn't agree more on point 11, that you have to push for publication yourself; and it's certainly true that being aggregated is a good way to put your thoughts in context, and to expose yourself to a larger readership. But I vehemently disagree with his point 4:

It can take time. A good article-style blog entry can take six hours to write!

Not that I think writing a blog post should take no time at all this particular one has been almost an hour in the making, now but because I feel that, simply, articles, with all their references, scientific or other background, and whatnot, simply do not belong on a blog. A bunch of articles with an RSS feed is not a blog, plain and simple. So while I do agree that it can take time, I do think you're doing fundamentally wrong if your blog post takes more than, say, an hour and a half, to be written. So, in the interest of being constructive, here are my own suggestions:

1. Don't think too much, just write. It may sound stupid, but the most important part about blogging is actually doing it, and not wondering about how or why.
2. Do reread if possible. While blog posts are usually read in a few minutes, they take much longer to write; it's easy to lose track of your line of thinking during that process, in which case you may end up with a completely incoherent post. That certainly is to be avoided.
3. Ciar n's argument that if it's worth doing, it's worth blogging about certainly holds merit, but I'd go one step further: if it's worth thinking about, it's also worth blogging about. After all, a blog is mostly a braindump, so why not?
   That's not to say every thought can be turned into a coherent blog post, and I have a bunch of half-finished unpublished blog posts on my local hard disk which I may revisit at some undefined point in the future; but the principle is there.
4. And last, but not least: don't care about what other people are doing. Your blog is your own, not someone else's; if you get an email that your content sucks, ignore it. If you get an email that you should be writing about something else instead, ignore it. You're not getting paid for your blog, are you?

I think we all in Debian agree that the current discussion and the votes are a cruel mess. But if anyone wants to blame anyone else for this, please consider some facts: The outcome of the vote depends on what is to be voted on. If the vote is "Eat shit or die" a majority of people might choose the shit. That's why our constitution allows everyone to amend the vote, to offer more options, so that people can vote for what they actually want. This might get messy, especially if the process is chaotic. It can only work if people take the time and consideration to discuss the suggestions long enough to get to sane values. But if you haste it will get messy. That there is so much haste currently is also our all fault. Of course if more people had worked on the firmware issues, we would not have this problem. But this is not the fault of one side. The other side could have worked on that too. Some "But I have nothing against firmware in the kernel." is as little an excuse for not working on it as "I do not need kernels for hardware without free firmwares". Because the outcomes of the last votes for sarge and etch made clear that just having the stuff in the kernel is no solution. Everyone that did not propose a GR to allow non-free firmware more than half a year ago and did not work on easing things for users needing non-free firmware has either to admit that it is also his fault by omission as much as those not wanting the firmware in there and not having done more to get rid of it. Or you have to admit you willfully did nothing to now take the release hostage for your goals. That said, I also want to speak against the "lenny without firmware will be totally unusable". I didn't look at the details. But when I in the last half year had some servers that needed some firmware, that was not even in the kernel and on the installation media, I was extremely surprised how easy it was to put it there and how anything went correctly without thinking much, the installer just copied the needed files directly on the installed system. The initrd generator must have included that somehow (for it was a firmware for the sata card, and it actually boots). And I think it might not even be needed on the installation media, but might also be inserted by some other means. (But putting it in the initrd of the netboot installer was just so easy, that I tried nothing else). Some post-scriptum: I personally would have deemed it more clean to have Peter Palfrader's proposal not made to amendment of the other vote. But if it had been handled otherwise, I definitely would have suggested an amendment to it (and perhaps some others, too). So do not think it would have made things much faster or easier to grasp. Another post-scriptum: It's the job of our secretary to protect and interpret the consitution. The only thing looking at the current discussions is why political partisans in some western countries not yet got to the idea of recalling judges whose job it is to protect the constituion. Perhaps because in that setting it would sound just too absurd...

After two and half months of development, new Gammu stable release is out. Since last testing version there are only minor changes in vCard export, but full changelog since 1.21.0 is quite long:

• Disable ATOBEX for Motorola V180.
• vCard can now store caller group and private flag (bug #269).
• vCard now stores location and memory type.
• Add ID for Nokia 6131 NFC (bug #775).
• Better skipping of corrupted messages in AT (bug #768).
• Autoload 6510 module if phone is S40 (bug #767).
• Add ID for Nokia 6500s (bug #770).
• Add automatic detection of Nokia phones (bug #770).
• Catch error when calls can not be deleted (bug #738).
• Better documentation of addnew (bug #734).
• Fix detection of OBEX capability on older Siemens phones.
• Try to detect wrongly formatted CMGL reply (bug #771);
• Handle phones which fail to report supported charsets.
• Fixed encoding of WAP indicator messages.
• Support for photos in vCard (bug #227).
• vC* saving now protects against buffer overflows.
• Drop own crosscompilation support, rely on CMake one.
• Also standard CMake parameters used when possible (eg. BUILDSHAREDLIBS).
• Search does not create thread for non existing devices.
• Fixed possible crash when backing up ringtones.
• Fix possible race condition in searching.
• Fixed invoking of CMake with output to custom directory.
• Compile on platforms where ssize_t does not exist.
• Fix detection of towlower on some compilers.
• Make Bluetooth compile using BCC.
• Fix compilation if strtoull does not exist.
• Compile on platforms where intptr_t does not exist.
• Fixed compilation in BCC (see changes above).
• Check whether compiler supports FUNCTION.
• Reimplement locking and add tests for it.
• GSM_SetDebugFileDescriptor now accepts flag whether file descriptor can be closed (bug #749).
• Soname change due to API breakage (see above).
• Fixed compilation on Mac OS X, thanks to Juan A. Bertolin for testing.
• Script gammu-config can now also work with whiptail.
• Minor fixes in gammu-config script.
• Extra spaces from connection or device name are now stripped.
• Automatically reinitialize FBUS connection if it is dropped.
• Disable OBEX with Motorola Z6c, it is broken (bug #746).
• Refresh manufacturer information on second init of AT (bug #746).
• Always get charset information on AT phone initialization.
• Better handling of OBEX switching for Siemens phones.
• Fix flags for 2630 and 3109c (bug #752).
• Fix handling of caller groups and picture IDs (bug #752).
• Properly set calendar location while adding (bug #747).
• Sign Windows binaries during build.
• Detect long FM station names (bug #727).
• Add ID for Nokia 2630b.
• Handle properly very long lines in vcards (bug #728).
• Do not build and install locales if gettext is not compiled.
• Increase number of calendar entries (bug #725).
• Leak free test runs.
• Support backup of phone phonebook from Siemens (bug #732).
• Properly handle GetNextMemory on Siemens (bug #732).
• Save textual category to backup (bug #737).
• Enable dashboard testing using CTest/CDash.
• Add option to do coverage analysis.
• Properly handle debug file closing.
• Add test case for debug logging.
• Fix decoding of some SMS messages from Nokia phones (bug #735).
• Hack for (still) unknown error code (bug #733).

You can download from usual place: http://cihar.com/gammu/, Binary packages will be available soon in all usual places (Debian Unstable, OpenSuse build service, Ubuntu PPA repository).

This is the worst vote that has come up since I m part of Debian. And Manoj the secretary has refused to listen to the remarks of many developers about the misleading titles/summaries, about the unjustified 3:1 ratio, and worst of all, about the mixing of multiple questions in a single ballot. I have ranked misleading options ( Reaffirm social contract at least) lowest and below Further discussion and sorted all the other options according to my preference, and ranked some of them equally when the choices answer different questions (where I can not prioritize any preferred outcome). I m not yet sure if I put Further discussion first or not. There s some hope that the vote will be cancelled and redone with separate ballots but I ve lost trust in Manoj s abilities to do his job properly. I m sure he s convinced that he s doing the right thing but that doesn t help at all, on the contrary. It also means we probably should fix the constitution to make it crystal-clear how the secretary should decide whether 3:1 ratio is needed for a given resolution or not. Not really the kind of thing I enjoy within Debian, but that s the price to pay if we want to continue to work together. On this and much more I agree with Russ Alberry. Update: Manoj resigned as secretary. I want to thank him for having taken this hard decision. And I sincerely hope he doesn t resign from Debian completely as our strength is also in our diversity of opinions. Partagez cet article / Share This

Well, everybody has been very vocal about it, so I will be too: I don t like current voting ballot, I won t defend that, but I do like Manoj as Debian s secretary and I don t think he deserves all the attacks he has been subject to. Short and clear.