RE: assimilating OpenBSD
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Schuldei [mailto:andreas@schuldei.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:17 AM
> To: Mark Berry
> Subject: Re: assimilating OpenBSD
>
>
> * Mark Berry (mark@shareaphoto.com) [010207 11:01]:
> > So basically what you are doing (if you don't mind me probing
> .. I wan't be
> > clearly on the same page if we are to work together on this
> project).. is
> > installing a 'base' version of OpenBSD and moving in the pkg mgr and and
> > debian tools on top of it.
>
> yes. plus you will need gmake from the ports. For personal
> convenience I also installed bash and vim, but that is not
> important.
>
> > Which version of OpenBSD are you working with?
>
> I took the current snapshot from the ftp servers. And this
> morning I checked out the CVS and recompiled tar, it was broken.
>
> > Is it going to be a full fork or run on top of future versions of BSD.
>
> I wnat to take advantage of the continuing code review of
> OpenBSD. I want to be able to keep on top of that an later have
> some kind of autobuilder running, which will happily compile
> away.
>
Can I ask a fundamental question.. I prefer to use FreeBSD as a server,
userland.. etc. I know that OpenBSD is a great box in terms of security
(the Best?) ... but... if I was ultimately concerned enough to sacrafice
all the user-side benifits of FreeBSD/Linux based distro.. wouldn't I want
to use a 'secure' version of OpenBSD? I can't imagine that too many people
use OpenBSD for the great driving experience. The installation, etc is a
bit more dificult.
Now on the same note... BSD has a great packaging and porting system,
arguably as good if not better than debians. I like the idea of using
debians packaging system to try cleanly organize and merge the porting of
code effort between the two systems.
I guess I must say that my main interest is having a distribution that would
be Linux-Like with a BSD core. (Is that silly?) It's all about
consistancy.
Now I am not going to abandon the idea if we all agree to move forward with
OpenBSD. ... but I think that it must be understood that the benifits of
secure and audited code will very quickly go away as we start to debianize
the distro.
If those benifts are gone should we look at using FreeBSD?
Should we look at even a more heavily striped down version such as the
Darwin kernel? (Though I don't know what we will do for drivers, etc..
probably not a good idea).
I will take your milestone list and goals and maybe make some modifications
to it if you don't mind with some of my proposals and see if we logically
decide what BSD we wish to use based on what our needs our out of the
system. I think that we have to do it in a way that will keep the DebianBSD
in line with the movement of the BSD system we are following. Maybe the end
result is a agnostic BSD based package managment system.
Anyway, all these are points of discussion but I would like to see these
decisions made sooner rather than later as I am anxious to use apt-get with
my BSD based system with my linux like environment. (Ok, thats my idea of
how it would be.. open for comments!) :)
> > (It's not going to just be a package port to OpenBSD and support future
> > versions of OpenBSD..) Or is it?
>
> That can happen as a addition later, if people want to use
> gphoto or Kdevelope on their Debian OpenBSD machine and this is
> not in OpenBSD yet. Did I understand the question correctly?
>
> > All of the gnu tools will port over quite easily.. (tar, etc etc).
>
> If we find no other way to get the packages build , we might
> install them, but I would try to get along with the OpenBSD
> tools, first. But I allready consider to use the gnutools for the
> packaging. I can hardly imagine how that should endanger any box
> but the build system.
>
> > The
> > Ports effort of BSD is great in that they do help maintain the subtle
> > differences in the OS and should be the base of the package
> building effort.
> > Probably wouldn't take too long to setup a 'base' server type
> distribution
> > with all the base gnu tools as well as things such as apache, sendmail,
> > zope, mysql, postgresql, gnu tools and make them accessable
> through apt-get.
>
> I guess so too. That would be a good alternative for step 7. I
> agree.
>
> > My company does run an ASP business and we have an emence amount of
> > bandwidth for hosting an ftp server for the packages and
> distribution and
> > would be happy to help there as well.
>
> It would be cool to have an OpenBSD box to fiddel around on and
> have accounts for several people to work on the job8 perhaps.
>
On this note, I have a SGI 1200 w/Dual CPU 700 PIII w/512MB ram and dual
SCSI 9GIG I could probably donate to this cause. I will set it up with the
BSD distro we all agree to use and haul it down to London (Our datacenter is
in the AboveNet London fascility).
We will need to setup a list of the people who will be involved with this
project and create accounts for key developers/members. (For obvious
reasons I don't want to have a hundred people running around chewing up my
bandwidth un-necesarily).. but we can do what we can. It will give a
reasonable box for testing and development.
> I use an old i486 here, which is slow but works. The Debian
> Network is also availabe for Package hosting. Since there is
> encryption in the source it should be outside the US. Where are
> you?
> I use pandora.debian.org right now.
Reply to: