[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: My ideas

At 08:26 PM 10/18/00 +0400, Wartan Hachaturow wrote:
Here is my ideas about the project.

1. License issues

In case we use the software which is written under BSD, it should be BSD. If it's GPL, it should stay GPL. It's as simple as it sounds. All the Debian-specific tools are GPL, so we don't have to worry about possible steal of our code :)

2. Userland

I think there is no need in GNU userland porting to the BSD, since the differences is not so big -- it's a useless waste of time. We have a lot more work to do. And, at last, we can create two base packages -- with BSD userland and with GNU one, just to satisfy the needs of addicted ones ;)

3. [Main one :)] Ports/Sources/Binaries

In my mind, having the binaries is a Good Thing for people with slow network connections and slow machines, so it's better to distribute binary packages for most users (those who have fast machines and networks anyway wouldn't want to wait until the compilation is done :). Concerning Linux compat issue: we are trying to build good stable and secure system, don't we? We would achieve that only using native-compiled binaries. _Only_ in the cases we have no choice, we should use linux-compat, but i think we should avoid it everywhere it's possible.

4. Configuration.

Important one. Personally, I don't like BSD configuring style -- the SysV way is much more convinient for me. But most of the BSD guys would want to have BSD. This is the thing which should be heavily discussed -- we should decide if SysV way is the right way for every Debian OS or not. I belive much of the debian-specific tools is based on the configuring style, and we should stay on SysV.
Btw, what way Hurd uses?

So, here is the summary of mine: BSD userland+Natively compiled deb's+SysV.
Maybe, we can make a kind of polling and once we decide we have enough votes to judge, start working?
The discussions here may last forever :))

TIA, Wartan.

Checking the recent postings on the list, they can be summerised as->

What diff groups are interested in...

debian ppl -  bsd kernel

bsd ppl -  maybe debian style packaging but *bsd's moving towards
                improvement and *bsd_ports-collection unification.
           most bsd'ers here suggesting debian participation in
                openpackages unified packaging system.

What diff groups are _not_ interested in...

debian ppl - helping openpackages to get the some of useful functionality
                from dpkg suite doesn't help debian much,
                they also don't get a debian with a *bsd kernel  ;-)
                But unified bsd/debian packaging system can be thaught
                about, but is it in the scope of this list ?

bsd ppl - debian userland on top of bsd kernel
                are they qualitatively diff to warrant one over the other?

          won't accept dpkg as it is, there are efforts to improve pkg_*,
                and would instead like debian participation in that

As wartan has initiated, We need to,
        * atleast narrow down possible alternatives of such a project
        * and have a seperate technical/emotional :) justification for
                everyone's opinion abt each of those components/points.

Points to discuss can be -:

1. kernel from...
        _Freebsd_   OR   _Net/Openbsd_

2. License issues
        _GPL_   OR   _BSD_

        There seems to be agreement about  -> BSD upstreams stay BSD.
                                              GPL'd upstream stays GPL.

3. Userland
        _gnu_   OR   _bsd_

4. composition  (ref: check eichin's posting)

             i ] debian userspace / libc  / rebuild packages_
        OR  ii ] debian userspace / glibc / port linux packages_
        OR  iii] debian userspace /  _linux emulation_
        OR   iv] bsd userspace    / libc  / repackage  bsd userspace sw_ ??

        OR a combination of 1st and last above...

5. Configuration
        _SysV_   OR   _bsd style_

/prasad gadgil (se-mumbai)

"What you do when you don't have to, determines what you will be when you
 can no longer help it." -Rudyard Kipling

Reply to: