Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
So this statement in the WikiP is false? systemd is Linux-only by design, as it relies upon features such as cgroups and fanotify.[6] Debian is avoiding the adoption of systemd due to this issue.[7] -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. I read an article online about some Linux constructs make it very difficult to port some software to BSD. This included systemd, also Xfce and GNOME 3. I figure this is why GNOME 3, out for some time now, has not yet been ported to FreeBSD ports or NetBSD pkgsrc. Tom ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
David Jackson said: In reference to the claims that systemd developers do not care about portability, this is deceptive and misleading. You should read the following interview of Lennart Poettering http://linuxfr.org/nodes/86687/comments/1249943 The amount of hubris and self confidence he deploys is really astounding. I will just quote two extracts: LinuxFr.org : Systemd use a lot of Linux only technologies (cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, etc). Do you really think the Linux API has been taking the role of the POSIX API and the other systems are irrelevant ? Lennart : Yes, I don't think BSD is really too relevant anymore, and I think that this implied requirement for compatibility with those systems when somebody hacks software for the free desktop or ecosystem is a burden, and holds us back for little benefit. and cherry on the cake LinuxFr.org : Why Linux desktop hasn't been adopted by the mainstream users ? Linus Torvalds seems to think it's mostly a social issue and not a technical one. Do you agree with him ? Lennart : I think we weren't innovative enough in the interface, and we didn't have a convincing message and clear platform. If you accept MacOS as benchmark for user interfaces, then we weren't really matching it, at best copying it. I think this is changing now, with GNOME 3 which is a big step forward as an interface for Linux and for the first time is something that has been strictly designed under UI design guidelines. -- Michel TALON ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
[ Michel Talon wrote on Wed 22.Aug'12 at 12:29:56 +0200 ] David Jackson said: In reference to the claims that systemd developers do not care about portability, this is deceptive and misleading. You should read the following interview of Lennart Poettering http://linuxfr.org/nodes/86687/comments/1249943 The amount of hubris and self confidence he deploys is really astounding. I will just quote two extracts: LinuxFr.org : Systemd use a lot of Linux only technologies (cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, etc). Do you really think the Linux API has been taking the role of the POSIX API and the other systems are irrelevant ? Lennart : Yes, I don't think BSD is really too relevant anymore, and I think that this implied requirement for compatibility with those systems when somebody hacks software for the free desktop or ecosystem is a burden, and holds us back for little benefit. This guy seems to be a real moron. What a ridiculous statement to make. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On 08/21/2012 09:04 PM, David Jackson wrote: In reference to the claims that systemd developers do not care about portability, this is deceptive and misleading. It implies that he is building in a dependance on intractable hardware platform dependance when this is absolutely not the case, there is no dependance on a hardware platform.There is nothing about systemd that FreeBSD could not easily support. Yes, his software does use system call facilities provided by Linux, but since this is a dependance on software systems, FreeBSD could easily add these facilities to its own libraries and kernel. This fact exposes what the complaints from some people are about, it has nothing to do with portability, because these issues can be easily addressed in software code by FreeBSD, it has to do with FreeBSD not wanting to implement equivalent functionality as Linux. The fact is, FreeBSD can fully support systemd and all kernel and system features, there is nothing here that is impossible for FreeBSD to support. By doing so, it would give users MORE freedom rather than less freedom. FreeBSD would not even be required to use systemd for its own bootup sequence, which can be BSD init scripts still, but, systemd could be made available on FreeBSD, called from FreeBSDs init scripts, for users that wants to use it. Some here would make it seem like it is impossible for FreeBSD to support systemd, nothing could be further from the truth. No one is stopping FreeBSD from implementing it or any other feature found in Linux. I carefully looked through the documentation of systemd, I could see nothing except for a well designed, powerful and flexible start up system that is a major improvement. It IS backwards compatable with SysV and init scripts, so, no one can say they are taking away someones capability to use their own init scripts. BSD could continue to use its own startup init system and optionally allow systemd to be called from this for software that needs systemd. So, FreeBSD does not even have to change much about its current init system to support systemd. systemd could be called from FreeBSDs current init scripts as an addon rather than needing to replace any of the existing init system. I basically cannot see a rational reason to not support it. If I were to hazard a guess, it's because systemd is intended to replace a subsystem which is simple and has had decades of testing with something that is as yet largely unproven. If not done properly, and with competent oversight, it could result in an unmaintainable system that requires more than just a text editor to repair. Just imagine losing a library against which systemd is compiled: no single-user mode because 'init' couldn't start at all now, and no /bin/sh because the startup scripts required to get the machine into a usable state are no longer written in bourne shell. But the larger issue, in my analysis, is that it forces feature creep into any other posix implementation that must support it to run software that depends upon it. FreeBSD has a jail implementation that is far more advanced and secure than anything Linux currently offers; yet systemd requires what basically amounts to a neutered version (containers) so that it can keep track of processes. Not a dishonourable endeavour in and of itself, but then it's like GEM/KMS all over again, where smaller, more resource-constrained teams are rushing to add otherwise-unneeded features to their kernels in such a way that won't cause instability or security vulnerabilities. In this case, there isn't even any compatibly-licensed reference code for containers that can be freely used; the implementation must be engineered from scratch. Lastly, it's also LGPL-licensed; either someone will have to convince the authors to dual-license it, or a BSD-licensed implementation will have to be written. With the current FreeBSD GPL-exodus, I don't see the adoption of further GPL/LGPL code having much chance of succeeding; especially when said code is required to actually bootstrap the userland. Personally, I think diversity is good, and systemd does offer alternate options that were previously lacking in a sysvinit/bsdinit world; but systemd could be a lot more flexible in supporting platforms that are other than Linux or GPL. -- Fuzzy love, -CyberLeo Technical Administrator CyberLeo.Net Webhosting http://www.CyberLeo.Net cyber...@cyberleo.net Furry Peace! - http://.fur.com/peace/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 12:29:56 +0200 Michel Talon articulated: David Jackson said: In reference to the claims that systemd developers do not care about portability, this is deceptive and misleading. You should read the following interview of Lennart Poettering http://linuxfr.org/nodes/86687/comments/1249943 The amount of hubris and self confidence he deploys is really astounding. I will just quote two extracts: LinuxFr.org : Systemd use a lot of Linux only technologies (cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, etc). Do you really think the Linux API has been taking the role of the POSIX API and the other systems are irrelevant ? Lennart : Yes, I don't think BSD is really too relevant anymore, and I think that this implied requirement for compatibility with those systems when somebody hacks software for the free desktop or ecosystem is a burden, and holds us back for little benefit. and cherry on the cake LinuxFr.org : Why Linux desktop hasn't been adopted by the mainstream users ? Linus Torvalds seems to think it's mostly a social issue and not a technical one. Do you agree with him ? Lennart : I think we weren't innovative enough in the interface, and we didn't have a convincing message and clear platform. If you accept MacOS as benchmark for user interfaces, then we weren't really matching it, at best copying it. I think this is changing now, with GNOME 3 which is a big step forward as an interface for Linux and for the first time is something that has been strictly designed under UI design guidelines. The critics complain that the new ideas merely introduces de minimis modifications and does nothing to amend the real faults in the system. The real problem is that true innovative development in FreeBSD has become stagnant. It has taken, and in some cases still not achieved equal standings with other OSs in many areas. Wireless technology, full USB support to name a few. It is ALWAYS easier to blame others for our failures than to admit the problem lies within ourselves. Thank God that everyone is not the complacent. Where would civilization be now if Edison had considered the candle the ultimate technological advancement in portable lighting or if Bell had considered the telegraph the pinnacle of high speed communication. Change is hard -- it always has been. There exists a strong subculture that would rather curse the darkness then light a candle. Debating with them is a waste of time. You should never argue with idiots because they will just drag you down to their levelthen beat you with experience. Simple ignore them and when time has passed them by and proven you right, you can smile knowing that you were. The frontiers are littered with dinosaurs. You could also enjoy a great day of golf which beats the hell out of arguing with those married to the past. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
Le 22/08/2012 13:59, Jerry a écrit : On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 12:29:56 +0200 Michel Talon articulated: David Jackson said: In reference to the claims that systemd developers do not care about portability, this is deceptive and misleading. You should read the following interview of Lennart Poettering http://linuxfr.org/nodes/86687/comments/1249943 The amount of hubris and self confidence he deploys is really astounding. I will just quote two extracts: LinuxFr.org : Systemd use a lot of Linux only technologies (cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, etc). Do you really think the Linux API has been taking the role of the POSIX API and the other systems are irrelevant ? Lennart : Yes, I don't think BSD is really too relevant anymore, and I think that this implied requirement for compatibility with those systems when somebody hacks software for the free desktop or ecosystem is a burden, and holds us back for little benefit. and cherry on the cake LinuxFr.org : Why Linux desktop hasn't been adopted by the mainstream users ? Linus Torvalds seems to think it's mostly a social issue and not a technical one. Do you agree with him ? Lennart : I think we weren't innovative enough in the interface, and we didn't have a convincing message and clear platform. If you accept MacOS as benchmark for user interfaces, then we weren't really matching it, at best copying it. I think this is changing now, with GNOME 3 which is a big step forward as an interface for Linux and for the first time is something that has been strictly designed under UI design guidelines. The critics complain that the new ideas merely introduces de minimis modifications and does nothing to amend the real faults in the system. The real problem is that true innovative development in FreeBSD has become stagnant. It has taken, and in some cases still not achieved equal standings with other OSs in many areas. Wireless technology, full USB support to name a few. It is ALWAYS easier to blame others for our failures than to admit the problem lies within ourselves. I would not call FreeBSD approach a failure, from my point of view it is definitely a choice. FreeBSD is all about the Least Astonishment. Sure it results in new technologies and paradigm making their way into the OS really slowly (though in the case of both wifi and USB (and ACPI by the way) most of the problem still lies in incomplete specs and dubious standard compliance from manufacturers). But on the other hand it also results in a system that is extremely coherent with himself and extremely stable over time. Almost every script I wrote under FreeBSD 4.x still work flawlessly in 9.1. In fact most *BSD contributors, write code for their needs - they improve FreeBSD because they need the new stuff, not because they have an agenda or a product to sell. Of course non vital improvement (graphics, sounds, 3D etc.) takes longer to be implemented. But I personally prefer an ugly frontend with a robust motor under the hood than the contrary. Thank God that everyone is not the complacent. Where would civilization be now if Edison had considered the candle the ultimate technological advancement in portable lighting or if Bell had considered the telegraph the pinnacle of high speed communication. Change is hard -- it always has been. There exists a strong subculture that would rather curse the darkness then light a candle. Debating with them is a waste of time. You should never argue with idiots because they will just drag you down to their levelthen beat you with experience. Simple ignore them and when time has passed them by and proven you right, you can smile knowing that you were. The frontiers are littered with dinosaurs. You could also enjoy a great day of golf which beats the hell out of arguing with those married to the past. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Jamie Paul Griffin ja...@kode5.net wrote: [ Michel Talon wrote on Wed 22.Aug'12 at 12:29:56 +0200 ] David Jackson said: In reference to the claims that systemd developers do not care about portability, this is deceptive and misleading. You should read the following interview of Lennart Poettering http://linuxfr.org/nodes/86687/comments/1249943 The amount of hubris and self confidence he deploys is really astounding. I will just quote two extracts: LinuxFr.org : Systemd use a lot of Linux only technologies (cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, etc). Do you really think the Linux API has been taking the role of the POSIX API and the other systems are irrelevant ? Lennart : Yes, I don't think BSD is really too relevant anymore, and I think that this implied requirement for compatibility with those systems when somebody hacks software for the free desktop or ecosystem is a burden, and holds us back for little benefit. That sort of shows my point in fact. There is nothing stopping FreeBSD from implementing cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, its not like Linux is going to enforce patents on these things, its software, and freebsd can easily add code to support these things, and as well, systemd. You are acting like there is dependancy in systemd on some hardware device you cannot change, this is not true, Software is flexible and can be easily extended and improved, they use some software features provided by the OS, and you clearly can install these features into FreeBSD if you would care to do so. FreeBSD can implement all of the software interfaces to make systemd and other software portable to FreeBSD. So this is clearly not about portability, FreeBSD is free to implement these software interfaces to assure that software is portable to FreeBSD. What this is about is FreeBSDs refusal to implement equivalent functionality as Linux has. On this, FreeBSD has only itself to blame if it refuses to do so, since FreeBSD clearly has the capability to easily add the code necessary. Clearly this is all FreeBSDs politics. It refuses to implement the features because Linux developed because of the animosity towards Linux. FreeBSD has a not made here syndrome. FreeBSD would rather criticize other OSs that are trying to improve their features and flexibility, and power, rather than to improve itself. As for FreeBSDs market share, it is vanishingly small on the desktop with far less uptake than Linux. It is also shrinking in the server area, there is increasingly little reason to use an OS that has worse hardware support, less functionality. Linux is just as reliable as FreeBSD and has more functionality by far. I have been a supporter of FreeBSD for some time, but it was becoming clear that Linux distributions can offer much more and are just as reliable, in addition to offering more capabilities, power and features. all of this has left little reason to keep using FreeBSD. Why use an OS that has less features and capabilities when there are more powerful alternatives with more capabilities that are just as reliable, available? This guy seems to be a real moron. What a ridiculous statement to make. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 09:41:05 -0400, David Jackson wrote: On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Jamie Paul Griffin ja...@kode5.net wrote: [ Michel Talon wrote on Wed 22.Aug'12 at 12:29:56 +0200 ] David Jackson said: In reference to the claims that systemd developers do not care about portability, this is deceptive and misleading. You should read the following interview of Lennart Poettering http://linuxfr.org/nodes/86687/comments/1249943 The amount of hubris and self confidence he deploys is really astounding. I will just quote two extracts: LinuxFr.org : Systemd use a lot of Linux only technologies (cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, etc). Do you really think the Linux API has been taking the role of the POSIX API and the other systems are irrelevant ? Lennart : Yes, I don't think BSD is really too relevant anymore, and I think that this implied requirement for compatibility with those systems when somebody hacks software for the free desktop or ecosystem is a burden, and holds us back for little benefit. That sort of shows my point in fact. There is nothing stopping FreeBSD from implementing cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, its not like Linux is going to enforce patents on these things, its software, and freebsd can easily add code to support these things, and as well, systemd. A problem might be that the Linux world is constantly changing. Do you remember the HAL and DBUS problems? When FreeBSD had implemented it, it has been abolished in Linux. There are of course Linux-oriented software solutions that heavily rely on Linux-specific things to fully function. Xfce is an example. In case FreeBSD doesn't offer low level functionality like kernel interfaces or library calls that are addressed by that software on Linux, it will make that software unusable (or at least limited in function) on FreeBSD. Assuming that more and more software _will_ be primarily developed ON and FOR Linux, it implies that FreeBSD will soon be out of that software. Of course FreeBSD can implement those requirements. I just think it's not _that_ easy because FREEBSD IS NOT LINUX. Many dependencies will be resolved, many things added to the kernel and system libraries, and when they are in a working state, Linux will already use something else. FreeBSD puts emphasize on durability, stability, the ability to predict things, and the UNIX principle to have small functional parts that do _one_ thing, and do it well, and to interconnect those parts, instead intending to build an egg-laying-wool-milk-sow, a one size fits all thing that does everything. Of course it's nice to have a system where different functionality can be plugged into to have basically the same purpose (e. g. start or stop something). FreeBSD has -- in ITS environment! -- such a system. Linux has a different system, has different systemS. The more the functional parts the OS and the applications are merged, as it is the case in Linux (where no the OS exists, even the kernel and the system tools are additional packages), the more problems this implies to systems like FreeBSD that have this functional distinction. However, integrating the OS more with the installed GUI (!) programs is massively important to attract desktop users with limited knowledge about basic computer operations. This seems to be a growing majority. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/08/fewer-and-fewer-people-want-to-know-about-computers-says-google/261271/ Not sure where this leads to... What this is about is FreeBSDs refusal to implement equivalent functionality as Linux has. I'm not competent to make a statement regarding the amount of work to do that, the benefit it brings and for how long it will work until the whole thing has to be replaced by something completely different. Still it would make sense to assume that it's not that easy. As for FreeBSDs market share, [...] FreeBSD _does not have_ any market share. It's not a commercial undertaking per se. It has usage share and even mind share. There is no way you could bring _any_ numbers regarding market share because (1st) it doesn't apply (e. g. like Which market share has air in comparison to coal? - stupid question, I know), and (2nd) as per the BSD license, you wouldn't even notice all the BSDs running in network gear, storage appliances, electric control units, display devices and so on. You have _zero_ chance to find any numbers here you could compare. [...] it is vanishingly small on the desktop with far less uptake than Linux. You mean usage share. Okay, agreed. FreeBSD is not a typically known desktop system (even though _I_ am using it on the desktop exclusively since 4.0). It's much more prominent in servers where durability and stability are much more important than bleeding edge features. You have no idea how many FreeBSD boxes are still out there, running 4.x, 5.x or 6.x, acting as a file server,
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2011-July/231832.html Already read and discussed/flamed here. -- Markiyan. On 22.08.2012 13:29, Michel Talon wrote: David Jackson said: In reference to the claims that systemd developers do not care about portability, this is deceptive and misleading. You should read the following interview of Lennart Poettering http://linuxfr.org/nodes/86687/comments/1249943 The amount of hubris and self confidence he deploys is really astounding. I will just quote two extracts: LinuxFr.org : Systemd use a lot of Linux only technologies (cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, etc). Do you really think the Linux API has been taking the role of the POSIX API and the other systems are irrelevant ? Lennart : Yes, I don't think BSD is really too relevant anymore, and I think that this implied requirement for compatibility with those systems when somebody hacks software for the free desktop or ecosystem is a burden, and holds us back for little benefit. and cherry on the cake LinuxFr.org : Why Linux desktop hasn't been adopted by the mainstream users ? Linus Torvalds seems to think it's mostly a social issue and not a technical one. Do you agree with him ? Lennart : I think we weren't innovative enough in the interface, and we didn't have a convincing message and clear platform. If you accept MacOS as benchmark for user interfaces, then we weren't really matching it, at best copying it. I think this is changing now, with GNOME 3 which is a big step forward as an interface for Linux and for the first time is something that has been strictly designed under UI design guidelines. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Wednesday 22 August 2012 15:41:05 David Jackson wrote: So this is clearly not about portability, FreeBSD is free to implement these software interfaces to assure that software is portable to FreeBSD. Really? You make software portable by writing it to one environment and then changing every other environment to suit the software? I'm not sure software portability means what you think it means. Jonathan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:41 PM, David Jackson djackson...@gmail.com wrote: That sort of shows my point in fact. There is nothing stopping FreeBSD from implementing cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, its not like Linux is going to enforce patents on these things, its software, and freebsd can easily add code to support these things, and as well, systemd. Right! Nothing prevents us from writing a Linux compat shim similar to the Linux-ABI (linuxulator) to provide the framework needed by systemd et al. Make it optional, if necessary, so that the base default FreeBSD system won't be contaminated. It would also be nice to be able to kldload linux drivers (binary blobs developed for Linux and provided by 3rd party hardware vendors), but that would be harder to implement. Then again, why not try? Isn't it like ndis(4), all over again? -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
Hi, I think it would be useful to get familiar with what systemd is, technically and fundamentally. Here is a thread in which a knowledgeable professional questions many technical aspects of it: open this thread in one browser window (to get a nice overview of what you already read): http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-June/thread.html#152323 and start with the first post in another window (the reason is that tricksters tried to change the thread subject, but if you follow thr thread with next post you will not miss anything; be patient - there are some intermediate posts that are noice): systemd: please stop trying to take over the world :) Denys Vlasenko http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-June/152323.html There are important points raised: - going beyond system init replacement, systemd to be a platform for OS, together with GNOME 3 - not adhering to UNIX principles (modularity, etc) - interference with sysadmin duties/decisions to set up the system (e.g. loading modules on its own and e.g. enabling sys capabilities and protocols) - there are many other phantom reasons systemd was introduced as the next thing after the sliced bread invention, like parallelization that is not (but they sold it as if they implemented concurrency) This is just an intro ... There is much more to be questioned if you know what and care to. The author of this snake oil knows what and why he sells it. He is not a UNIX mind. One can scratch her head thinking what kind of pseudo progress can be sold to those goofies in Linux ecosystem, and apparently in *BSD ecosystem as well. The Slackware dev hit it exactly on the nail ! Think and enjoy it. I will eventually comment more on it later as well. jb ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
David == David Jackson djackson...@gmail.com writes: David The fact is, FreeBSD can fully support systemd and all kernel and system David features, there is nothing here that is impossible for FreeBSD to David support. So this statement in the WikiP is false? systemd is Linux-only by design, as it relies upon features such as cgroups and fanotify.[6] Debian is avoiding the adoption of systemd due to this issue.[7] -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/ Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On 08/20/12 16:42, Mark Felder wrote: Those in on the core teams here are very well aware. Did you notice we've survived this long without ALSA? :-) However, this is very good reading for anyone who hasn't looked at Linux lately, and it's worth mentioning that this is snowballing quickly. I used to really like some Linux distros. I've been working closely with FreeBSD for 3 years now and after watching Linux change in those 3 years from this distance I'm not sure I want to go back. Everything that originally excited me about *nix operating systems is gone; it's a big convoluted mess now. This isn't a good sign and I hope someone has the sense enough to stand their ground and tell RedHat/Poettering NO. TEAR DOWN THIS WALL, MR GORB^H^H^H^HPOETTERING I had the honor to meet that Mr. Poettering in person at a conference a while ago and tried to discuss the portability issues caused by the imminent proliferation of an over-engineered and unnecessary subsystem like systemd. My conclusion was that the guy talks a lot and never listens (mirroring his on-line behavior) and in general is a type of guy I had rather see in the enemy camp, instead of in the ranks of a (in my case) valued business partner. Also, he appears to have practically free reign within Red Hat, where currently nobody seems to have a clear overview of the OS related issues and system initialization is considered a minor technical feature. So I don't think you should expect Mr. Poettering to tear down any walls any time soon 8-) I can only hope that FreeBSD and the leftover systemd averse Linux distros can prevent higher level subsystems (like Xorg, KDE, Xfce, etc) to depend too much on current and future systemd features. Maybe this is an opportunity for the mostly invisible core team of FreeBSD to publicly take a position here, if only to take away concerns of users with respect to systemd portability issues in the future. Kind regards, Hans Ottevanger ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 09:42:32AM -0500, Mark Felder wrote: Those in on the core teams here are very well aware. Did you notice we've survived this long without ALSA? :-) However, this is very good reading for anyone who hasn't looked at Linux lately, and it's worth mentioning that this is snowballing quickly. I used to really like some Linux distros. I've been working closely with FreeBSD for 3 years now and after watching Linux change in those 3 years from this distance I'm not sure I want to go back. Everything that originally excited me about *nix operating systems is gone; it's a big convoluted mess now. This isn't a good sign and I hope someone has the sense enough to stand their ground and tell RedHat/Poettering NO. TEAR DOWN THIS WALL, MR GORB^H^H^H^HPOETTERING Hallelujah. Poettering and his ilk represent the gravest threat to the Linux ecosystem I've ever seen. I switched from Debian to FreeBSD in late 2005 or early 2006, having not touched FreeBSD much before that. Early the year before last year, I got a laptop and discovered that I should have paid more attention to what I was buying, because at the time FreeBSD didn't support the laptop's graphics. I thought Well, Debian isn't as nice as FreeBSD, but it was pretty good, so I'll use that. Ever since then, I've spent uncounted hours writing hackish wrapper code to paper over the disaster area that is system management in the Linux world now. I wrote an article for TechRepublic about some of my experiences (and other gripes about the Linux world after five years away from it) titled NetworkManager, the Fifth Horseman of the Apocalinux. The more we can avoid code written by Poettering and anything remotely like it, the better off we will be, I'm sure. Luckily, he wants to help us; he has stated that he believes writing quality, portable code somehow hinders innovation, and as such he goes out of his way to avoid portability concerns. Good riddance. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 10:09 AM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, here is an interesting comment (basically echoing other people's view) on Linux developments: http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20120820 Reader Comments 1 o Arch and systemd (by Microlinux on 2012-08-20 10:11:39 GMT from France) Much has been said on the subject of Systemd. Let me quote Eric Hameleers, one of Slackware's developers. [...] systemd is essentially evil. It is invasive, extremely hostile to other environments, threatening to kill non-Linux ecosystems which have hal, udev, dbus, consolekit, polkit, udisks, upower and friends as dependencies. And every iteration of the software written by the Redhat employees who are responsible for hal, udev, consiolekit, polkit and now systemd are incompatible with previous releases, re-implementing their bad ideas with new bad ideas... basically proving that these Redhat employees must be declared unfit to work on the core of a Linux distro. However, the influence of their employer is so big that these products are forced upon the wider UNIX community and at some point it will be assimilate or die. I hope we (Slackware) will find a way where we do not have to assimilate but still manage to keep the distro working. I have high hopes for KDE which has no Redhat ties and so far, manages to stay clear of this mess, sticking to widely accepted standards. Cheers from a Slackware user. For those of you who are unfamiliar - systemd is a replacement for SysV, LSB, and Upstart init subsystem scripts. Together with some other technologies like GNOME 3 (soon GNOME OS ?) they are aiming at being Microsoft-like Linux distro (soon OS ?). On my FreeBSD machine: $ ls /var/db/pkg/ ... hal-0.5.14_19/ dbus-1.4.14_i3/ consolekit-0.4.3/ polkit-0.99/ upower-0.9.7/ ... Also, once again I refer to Linux-related ports in *BSD ecosystem http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/ports.cgi?query=linuxstype=all and warn against becoming entangled in affairs of Linux ecosystem. jb ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org I will throw in my two cents. Systemd sounds fine to me. I think that having additional features such as event based startup of scripts is something that is okay and not a problem. I think as long as systemd supports SysV init and BSD startup scripts, it is fine. Remember you are free to have your own startup scripts run from systemd. The fact is that systemd is more powerful, its features are available but no one is absolutely required to use every feature. I believe people here would rather complain about it rather than have FreeBSD support it, in the process making FreeBSD better. Instead of making FreeBSD better all they know how to do is criticize OSs that are trying to improve things. I dont think the complaints here have anything to do with a shortcoming of systemd, i think it has to do with people who would rather attack anyone who implements something that is more powerful than what FreeBSD provides, so FreeBSD does not have to compete with a better, more flexible alternative. There is nothing stopping FreeBSD from adding the dependancy system features that are needed by systemd so that FreeBSD can use it. Instead of complaining about Linux implementing something better, why not match it? No one is stopping FreeBSD from implementing its own BSD systemd program. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 9:20 PM, David Jackson djackson...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 10:09 AM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, here is an interesting comment (basically echoing other people's view) on Linux developments: http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20120820 Reader Comments 1 o Arch and systemd (by Microlinux on 2012-08-20 10:11:39 GMT from France) Much has been said on the subject of Systemd. Let me quote Eric Hameleers, one of Slackware's developers. [...] systemd is essentially evil. It is invasive, extremely hostile to other environments, threatening to kill non-Linux ecosystems which have hal, udev, dbus, consolekit, polkit, udisks, upower and friends as dependencies. And every iteration of the software written by the Redhat employees who are responsible for hal, udev, consiolekit, polkit and now systemd are incompatible with previous releases, re-implementing their bad ideas with new bad ideas... basically proving that these Redhat employees must be declared unfit to work on the core of a Linux distro. However, the influence of their employer is so big that these products are forced upon the wider UNIX community and at some point it will be assimilate or die. I hope we (Slackware) will find a way where we do not have to assimilate but still manage to keep the distro working. I have high hopes for KDE which has no Redhat ties and so far, manages to stay clear of this mess, sticking to widely accepted standards. Cheers from a Slackware user. For those of you who are unfamiliar - systemd is a replacement for SysV, LSB, and Upstart init subsystem scripts. Together with some other technologies like GNOME 3 (soon GNOME OS ?) they are aiming at being Microsoft-like Linux distro (soon OS ?). On my FreeBSD machine: $ ls /var/db/pkg/ ... hal-0.5.14_19/ dbus-1.4.14_i3/ consolekit-0.4.3/ polkit-0.99/ upower-0.9.7/ ... Also, once again I refer to Linux-related ports in *BSD ecosystem http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/ports.cgi?query=linuxstype=all and warn against becoming entangled in affairs of Linux ecosystem. jb ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org In reference to the claims that systemd developers do not care about portability, this is deceptive and misleading. It implies that he is building in a dependance on intractable hardware platform dependance when this is absolutely not the case, there is no dependance on a hardware platform.There is nothing about systemd that FreeBSD could not easily support. Yes, his software does use system call facilities provided by Linux, but since this is a dependance on software systems, FreeBSD could easily add these facilities to its own libraries and kernel. This fact exposes what the complaints from some people are about, it has nothing to do with portability, because these issues can be easily addressed in software code by FreeBSD, it has to do with FreeBSD not wanting to implement equivalent functionality as Linux. The fact is, FreeBSD can fully support systemd and all kernel and system features, there is nothing here that is impossible for FreeBSD to support. By doing so, it would give users MORE freedom rather than less freedom. FreeBSD would not even be required to use systemd for its own bootup sequence, which can be BSD init scripts still, but, systemd could be made available on FreeBSD, called from FreeBSDs init scripts, for users that wants to use it. Some here would make it seem like it is impossible for FreeBSD to support systemd, nothing could be further from the truth. No one is stopping FreeBSD from implementing it or any other feature found in Linux. I carefully looked through the documentation of systemd, I could see nothing except for a well designed, powerful and flexible start up system that is a major improvement. It IS backwards compatable with SysV and init scripts, so, no one can say they are taking away someones capability to use their own init scripts. BSD could continue to use its own startup init system and optionally allow systemd to be called from this for software that needs systemd. So, FreeBSD does not even have to change much about its current init system to support systemd. systemd could be called from FreeBSDs current init scripts as an addon rather than needing to replace any of the existing init system. I basically cannot see a rational reason to not support it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
Hi, here is an interesting comment (basically echoing other people's view) on Linux developments: http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20120820 Reader Comments 1 o Arch and systemd (by Microlinux on 2012-08-20 10:11:39 GMT from France) Much has been said on the subject of Systemd. Let me quote Eric Hameleers, one of Slackware's developers. [...] systemd is essentially evil. It is invasive, extremely hostile to other environments, threatening to kill non-Linux ecosystems which have hal, udev, dbus, consolekit, polkit, udisks, upower and friends as dependencies. And every iteration of the software written by the Redhat employees who are responsible for hal, udev, consiolekit, polkit and now systemd are incompatible with previous releases, re-implementing their bad ideas with new bad ideas... basically proving that these Redhat employees must be declared unfit to work on the core of a Linux distro. However, the influence of their employer is so big that these products are forced upon the wider UNIX community and at some point it will be assimilate or die. I hope we (Slackware) will find a way where we do not have to assimilate but still manage to keep the distro working. I have high hopes for KDE which has no Redhat ties and so far, manages to stay clear of this mess, sticking to widely accepted standards. Cheers from a Slackware user. For those of you who are unfamiliar - systemd is a replacement for SysV, LSB, and Upstart init subsystem scripts. Together with some other technologies like GNOME 3 (soon GNOME OS ?) they are aiming at being Microsoft-like Linux distro (soon OS ?). On my FreeBSD machine: $ ls /var/db/pkg/ ... hal-0.5.14_19/ dbus-1.4.14_i3/ consolekit-0.4.3/ polkit-0.99/ upower-0.9.7/ ... Also, once again I refer to Linux-related ports in *BSD ecosystem http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/ports.cgi?query=linuxstype=all and warn against becoming entangled in affairs of Linux ecosystem. jb ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
Those in on the core teams here are very well aware. Did you notice we've survived this long without ALSA? :-) However, this is very good reading for anyone who hasn't looked at Linux lately, and it's worth mentioning that this is snowballing quickly. I used to really like some Linux distros. I've been working closely with FreeBSD for 3 years now and after watching Linux change in those 3 years from this distance I'm not sure I want to go back. Everything that originally excited me about *nix operating systems is gone; it's a big convoluted mess now. This isn't a good sign and I hope someone has the sense enough to stand their ground and tell RedHat/Poettering NO. TEAR DOWN THIS WALL, MR GORB^H^H^H^HPOETTERING ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:09:12 + (UTC) jb articulated: here is an interesting comment (basically echoing other people's view) on Linux developments: http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20120820 Reader Comments 1 o Arch and systemd (by Microlinux on 2012-08-20 10:11:39 GMT from France) Much has been said on the subject of Systemd. Let me quote Eric Hameleers, one of Slackware's developers. [...] systemd is essentially evil. It is invasive, extremely hostile to other environments, threatening to kill non-Linux ecosystems which have hal, udev, dbus, consolekit, polkit, udisks, upower and friends as dependencies. And every iteration of the software written by the Redhat employees who are responsible for hal, udev, consiolekit, polkit and now systemd are incompatible with previous releases, re-implementing their bad ideas with new bad ideas... basically proving that these Redhat employees must be declared unfit to work on the core of a Linux distro. However, the influence of their employer is so big that these products are forced upon the wider UNIX community and at some point it will be assimilate or die. I hope we (Slackware) will find a way where we do not have to assimilate but still manage to keep the distro working. I have high hopes for KDE which has no Redhat ties and so far, manages to stay clear of this mess, sticking to widely accepted standards. Cheers from a Slackware user. For those of you who are unfamiliar - systemd is a replacement for SysV, LSB, and Upstart init subsystem scripts. Together with some other technologies like GNOME 3 (soon GNOME OS ?) they are aiming at being Microsoft-like Linux distro (soon OS ?). On my FreeBSD machine: $ ls /var/db/pkg/ ... hal-0.5.14_19/ dbus-1.4.14_i3/ consolekit-0.4.3/ polkit-0.99/ upower-0.9.7/ ... Also, once again I refer to Linux-related ports in *BSD ecosystem http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/ports.cgi?query=linuxstype=all and warn against becoming entangled in affairs of Linux ecosystem. Change is scary. There were those who believed in the early 1900's that there were no new discoveries to be made or inventions to be designed and implemented. Thank God that there were those who said, Wow, this 8086 processor is cool; however, I think we can do better. Change is always scary and sometimes even dangerous; however, everything either evolves or dies. Unless someone is holding a gun to your head forcing you to accept changes that you do not approve of, I do not see a problem. With that said, telling others that they have to watch their TV by candle light is an extremely limited view of the bigger picture. An analog man in a digital world can be confusing and scary. Personally, I embrace progress. Even if there are ten failures in a row, that one success can be an life changing idea that can alter the course of an entire industry. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
Jerry jerry at seibercom.net writes: However, the influence of their employer is so big that these products are forced upon the wider UNIX community and at some point it will be assimilate or die. ... Personally, I embrace progress. Even if there are ten failures in a row, that one success can be an life changing idea that can alter the course of an entire industry. Well, this is not about progress, not even about the pace of it. It is about an ecosystem, in which a professional company tries to dominate it by my way, or high way approach (you know it when you follow development of Fedora, their test system distro). Because of the nature of that ecosystem called free and open source software, what is implemented has great impact on it by way of sharing and like-mindedness. What bothers me (and few other people, even inside Red Hat/Fedora) is them speaking from both sides of their mouth. On one side they call themselves UNIX-like, on the other they violate many principles of UNIX philosophy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy This is not a religion (to some it may be), but a set of cultural norms and philosophical approaches to developing software based on the experience of leading developers of the Unix operating system - they are relevant beyond any doubt. Let me mention few of them, like modularity and composition, that are violated by software like systemd, GNOME, etc. They also want to build a monolithic OS based on violation of these principles. The end effect is, they consciously want to screw up Linux and non-Linux (UNIX, *BSD, etc) ecosystems that opt not to follow them (read some additional comments that appeared in the meantime in the comments section of Distrowatch). This is a bad thing for all UNIX or UNIX-like ecosystems, performed under the noble flag of progress to neutralize and fight opposition. jb ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
Mark Felder wrote: Those in on the core teams here are very well aware. Did you notice we've survived this long without ALSA? :-) However, this is very good reading for anyone who hasn't looked at Linux lately, and it's worth mentioning that this is snowballing quickly. I used to really like some Linux distros. I've been working closely with FreeBSD for 3 years now and after watching Linux change in those 3 years from this distance I'm not sure I want to go back. Everything that originally excited me about *nix operating systems is gone; it's a big convoluted mess now. This isn't a good sign and I hope someone has the sense enough to stand their ground and tell RedHat/Poettering NO. You hit the nail on the head for me. For quite a few years I have tried Skype on various flavors of Linux machines all with the same end result: in order to use the microphone Pulseaudio had to be disabled. It's as if the guy that started it (Poettering) never conceived needing to use a microphone with a sound server and never tried it. So, in my opinion Pulseaudio is software left unfinished. Never mind such unfinished and untested as it was, it was mind-numbing to see all the 'distros' incorporate it as a default. Then Poettering moved on to systemd. My reservations are several. Developeritus notwithstanding, I am left to wonder whether he will 'finish' systemd or walk away from it when he gets bored with it, leaving it in the same kind of mess he left Pulseaudio. Now I truly like the idea and concept of Pulseaudio - it would just be nice if the author and project made it work the way an end-user sitting in front of his computer expects it to work. So called 'developeritus' is a fundamental disconnect between coders who code to please themselves and pat themselves on the back for adding 'features' and end-users who utilize computers to do other work. Anyway, enough rant from the my $.02 dept. I perceive the 'developeritus' affliction as a huge elephant in the open source software room that no one wants to talk about. I am definitely NOT against technological advances in software and the state of the art moving forward; indeed I welcome it. But, if it's broken like Pulseaudio I don't want to have anything to do with it. If it means using it requires me to spend countless hours trying to make it work instead of putting the time towards paying work then I do not need it getting in my way. Devs who code for ego gratification among their peers instead of trying to produce something a computer user might need should attempt to connect to this concept. And I see somewhat more connect in the FreeBSD community, which is a line-item on my list of what attracts me to continue using it. -Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
== jb wrote on Mon 20.Aug'12 at 17:40:40 + == The end effect is, they consciously want to screw up Linux and non-Linux (UNIX, *BSD, etc) ecosystems that opt not to follow them (read some additional comments that appeared in the meantime in the comments section of Distrowatch). This is a bad thing for all UNIX or UNIX-like ecosystems, performed under the noble flag of progress to neutralize and fight opposition. jb I have to say I completely agree. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 17:40:40 + (UTC) jb articulated: This is a bad thing for all UNIX or UNIX-like ecosystems, performed under the noble flag of progress to neutralize and fight opposition. Do you have any idea how idiotic that statement sounds? What are you planning on doing? Are you going to lay siege to their domains and prepare for a full frontal assault? Seriously though, I have spent years attempting to get things to work in FreeBSD with either utter or partial failure. Wireless N NICs were totally orphaned by FreeBSD for years. Now, reluctantly I would assume, there is some partial support. Support for FLASH basically sucks. Hell, there is not even a viable Tex-Live port, an application that I have working perfectly on a Windows machine. The list goes on and on. The only constant I have been able to determine is that the open-source community, and FreeBSD in particular, would rather play the blame game as opposed to correcting the problem. Everyone else is always to blame, when in reality, all that is needed to determine the true source of the problem is to look in the mirror. The answer will stare them right in the face. I no longer spend days trying to debug a problem that I did not create. My time is just way to valuable for that nonsense. I simply find an acceptable alternative and move on. I don't need to be taking more drugs to control my blood pressure. I would strongly suggest that you find alternatives that suit your needs and leave the past behind. You'll feel better and enjoy life more. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
nice ad hominem screed On 08/20/2012 12:57, Jerry wrote: On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 17:40:40 + (UTC) jb articulated: This is a bad thing for all UNIX or UNIX-like ecosystems, performed under the noble flag of progress to neutralize and fight opposition. Do you have any idea how idiotic that statement sounds? What are you planning on doing? Are you going to lay siege to their domains and prepare for a full frontal assault? Seriously though, I have spent years attempting to get things to work in FreeBSD with either utter or partial failure. Wireless N NICs were totally orphaned by FreeBSD for years. Now, reluctantly I would assume, there is some partial support. Support for FLASH basically sucks. Hell, there is not even a viable Tex-Live port, an application that I have working perfectly on a Windows machine. The list goes on and on. The only constant I have been able to determine is that the open-source community, and FreeBSD in particular, would rather play the blame game as opposed to correcting the problem. Everyone else is always to blame, when in reality, all that is needed to determine the true source of the problem is to look in the mirror. The answer will stare them right in the face. I no longer spend days trying to debug a problem that I did not create. My time is just way to valuable for that nonsense. I simply find an acceptable alternative and move on. I don't need to be taking more drugs to control my blood pressure. I would strongly suggest that you find alternatives that suit your needs and leave the past behind. You'll feel better and enjoy life more. -- Dave Robison Sales Solution Architect II FIS Banking Solutions 510/621-2089 (w) 530/518-5194 (c) 510/621-2020 (f) da...@vicor.com david.robi...@fisglobal.com _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:57:14 -0500, je...@seibercom.net wrote: Support for FLASH basically sucks. Please stop trolling. I've been using flash with zero issues for 3 years. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
