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

Re: kfreebsd-9 in experimental?

2011/6/15 Darko Hojnik <hojnik@virtualizing.org>:
> Please tell me what makes KfreeBSD for you interesting to use? What does
> KfreeBSD to makes the World a little bit better? It's a philosophical
> question.
> So for me it's not interesting to deploy it on a Desktop. Because
> FreeBSD/KfreeBSD leaks on support with mainstream-consumer like hardware.
> Accept it because it is like is. The Slogan of FreeBSD is the power to
> serve... Thats the real focus of FreeBSD. On a server FreeBSD is in many
> cases better then Linux. And Debian GNU KfreeBSD is the logical pragmatic
> way to simplifying the Power of the FreeBSD-Kernel with an good
> package-management.
> As an example Netapp is for storage one of the well known backbones on the
> cloud. Would it be not better for the world if Debian kFreeBSD would takes
> this part? Both has got the same kernel. Typical Desktops and Workstations
> of today begins to be outdated. And within ten years they will haves no
> future anymore. And that would be great! Everything in the Cloud usable on
> demand just in time!
> But the clock ticks and ticks...
> Debian and all another opensource-projects has to realize whats currently
> happen. I think they haves a good chance to win this game. If it will be
> lost then it will lost everything. Democracy and generally every Freedom not
> on Software only, on every part of life would be controlled on some
> company's.
> My self is using more then 10 years Debian. Some years ago I could every day
> say that debian ships mass with class. But in some cases currently it's mass
> only instead class...
> I think it will be nice if this project would set more focus on quality. The
> Debian-installer supports only a basic install on ZFS. They is no support to
> install it on subvolumes. Also to handle compression, DEDUP and other
> features of ZFS. So you have still to choose debootstrap for an install in a
> datacenter.

Thanks for your input Darko.  I understand your concern but one often needs
to balance the benefit against the cost, and IMHO providing HEAD snapshots via
kfreebsd-9 has significant benefit with a very small cost (updating the package
takes very little effort).

> If you are hacking on the FreeBSD kernel so also you hack for an better
> KfreeBSD too. Don't take everything only, give something back. Debian is not
> Ubuntu.

When it comes to giving back, having a readily available staging area that
tracks HEAD makes it easier for patches to be merged upstream.

> I'm looking very interested on this project. But I see very much open
> problems. Why merge unnecessary stuff they will need to much time to solve
> currently not present problems?

As for D-I, writing complete ZFS support would require significant manpower,
which we don't have.  Unless you want to help, of course.

Which other open problems did you have in mind?

Robert Millan

Reply to: