> I do not buy that porting Debian to work on top of (parts of) OpenBSD > userspace is a good thing. OpenBSD itself works quite well enough, and > porting Debian on top of it doesn't seem to buy much, and definitely > not at the cost of complexity, loss of functionality and extra work it > would require from those accustomed to working on top of the GNU tools. Right through this thread I've found myself wondering exactly what Debian is. As I see it, Debian is an operating system in its own right. It uses Linux (or the Hurd) as its kernel, with a (mostly) GNU userspace. What is OpenBSD? It's also an operating system. The kernel and the userspace come from the same place though. So what exactly does it mean to produce Debian OpenBSD? To me at least, that only really makes sense if you make it a (Open)BSD kernel with a GNU userspace. Otherwise you'll end up with a BSD kernel, a BSD userspace, and a port of dpkg. (Yes, I know its more that that). I don't mean to trivialise the efforts of the people working on the BSD port, I just wonder what removing the (parts of) the GNU userspace will acheive. For me at least, unless its functionally equivalent to other Debian ports, its not really Debian. (By functionally equivalent I mean if I run make (for example) on both systems, it will work identically (config, switches, everything) on both systems). Regards, Rob.
Description: PGP signature