Trying to support ext2 at this point would be a big waste of time/effort,
UFS works, use it. If people still want ext2, it should be worked on
later. Very later, like when the whole system is up and running. Having
ext2 support is, IMHO, a nicety feature - ie. it's not needed, but it
would be nice. Besides, Ext2 is not a debian thing, since Debian != Linux.
We have to take one step at a time, first, I think we should have dpkg and
apt working fully, and we should stick with the BSD libc, because anything
that is a huge pain to port can be run in Linux binary compat until it is
ported. Keep in mind that a lot of the porting work has already been done
by the BSD ports collections, they should not be ignored. Also, a lot of
work was done on this in the past (read the archives of debian-bsd) - it
will probably pay off if we take notes from their effort.
Maybe another vote should be held on the steps to be taken to get things
> Guten Abend, Erich,
> > First thing is that i (but i'm no insider) just don't believe that
> > the difference between UFS and ext2 is so much; if it were, i believe
> > that Linux hacker's would already have implemented big UFS support in
> > the Linux kernel as well, just to get that better fs.
> Yes, and if ext2 were better than UFS, the BSD kernel hackers would
> already have implemented big ext2 support, wouldn't they? The point is
> that, for the moment, we're trying to get a system running with a BSD
> kernel - and the BSD kernel happens to have much better support for UFS
> than ext2. So I'd say let's go UFS.
> > But most user's will want to run Debian/BSD as well as Debian/Linux.
> The interesting question is, will they want to run it on the same
> partition? While that would certainly be a very admirable long-term
> goal, I'm sure it's not going to happen anytime soon, even if we try to
> bend the BSD kernel over to ext2.
> > As UFS support is still "experimental" (it's read-only, isn't it?)
> > people might prefer to use ext2 as their root fs for Debian/BSD - so
> > they can boot their Linux and access the data from there as well.
> > Sure, you could install *BSD as well to your existing Debian Linux...
> > It's just that people might prefer.
> If we're going to be so pessimistic as to plan for people wanting to
> access their data with more than read-only support from another OS, we
> might as well drop the project, IMHO.
> > But i believe that people will _expect_ to run glibc "by default".
> > They expect a "Debian" System, which means "as compatible to
> > Debian/Linux as possible" - so i will expect all my programs (unless
> > they are kernel-specific) to compile in the exactly same way, to
> > behave in the same way etc.
> Actually, a "Debian" system means just that - a system which conforms
> to the Debian Policy. For some people, myself included, one of the
> points of this project is to prove that Debian is more than just Linux.
> I'm not sure what you mean by compatibility here - do you mean binary
> compatibility? If so, it's already been done. And I, for one, don't
> just want a BSD system that can do everything Linux can and does
> everything like Linux does. I want a BSD system that has the advantages
> of a BSD system with the ease-of-maintenance and consistancy of Debian.
> If you ask me, the disadvantages of using glibc far outweigh those of
> using BSD libc. glibc would be a pretty big porting effort - sure to
> get this project stuck at stage 1, if you ask me. The disadvantages of
> BSD libc will be very small, as far as I can tell. You want everything
> to compile exactly the same as on a GNU/Linux system - well, I have
> news for you, it's called GNU autoconf...
> > Debian/BSD should NOT become FreeBSD+dpkg.
> > i think it's intended to become Debian with a BSD kernel.
> > But still 99.9% Debian.
> Keeping in mind that Debian != Linux.
> Save the internet!
> Join the fight against the tyranny of ICANN!
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
- Re: vote
- From: Erich Schubert <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Re: vote
- From: Michael Goetze <email@example.com>