On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > Well, Debian diskspace is already blowing out (for the archive, not
> > for installed systems). If the emulation works just as well, we can
> > save a lot of time by not recompiling.
On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 10:02:07AM +0100, Per Lundberg wrote:
> Well, it doesn't work perfectly. Some system calls are missing. I did
> a little test; I mounted my Linux root under /usr/compat/linux, and
> tried to run bash, and it failed. dpkg seemed to start, though, so
> it's probably quite complete. We could go for the approach just to fix
> up the FreeBSD kernel, but is this really the best solution?
Actually, it depends on what you're trying to accomplish:
If you think that FreeBSD is a superior kernel, and you'd like to make
it available to a wide community, you're going to want to let existing
linux users try it out in a controlled fashion. Which means you're
going to want people to be able to install a FreeBSD kernel along side
their Linux kernel and try running the system under both, choosing their
kernel at boot time.
Of course, for binaries which are closely wired into the kernel, I can
see that there'd for freebsd specific packages. But when I see things
like bison being "ported" for debian/freebsd I can't help but think that
something very different is happening.