On Monday, July 26, 2021 08:37 PM IST, Judah Richardson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 9:33 AM [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Monday, July 26, 2021 07:36 PM IST, "Udo Grabowski (IMK)" < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 26/07/2021 14:51, [email protected] wrote: > > > > On Monday, July 26, 2021 05:34 PM IST, "Udo Grabowski (IMK)" < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On 26/07/2021 13:35, [email protected] wrote: > > > >>> cross-posting since i accidentally addressed this one to > > omnios-discuss the first time. sorry. > > > >>> > > > >>> i have noticed a trend amongst communities oriented towards building > > open source unix-like operating systems; the project starts off as being > > quite lean, but then acquires a lot of fat due to dependence on the > > non-core toolkit. > > > >>> > > > >>> from the illumos perspective, i would say, "core" would be the > > kernel + userland, all written using a combination of ansi-c and the system > > default shell (korn). > > > >>> > > > >>> afaik, 'ips' is built using python which supposedly coordinates > > between minisat (written in ansi-c), the userland and some mechanism to get > > files off the network. > > > >>> i am not yet clear about how 'ips' works, and i am working at > > overcoming that by consulting "till wegmueller" who has written a couple of > > implementations of 'ips' using different programming languages (it think; > > go and rust), but, it would be worthwhile to get a broader input from those > > in the community who were from "sun microsystems" as to why python was > > chosen over ksh93. > > > >>> > > > >>> also, after an email thread on omnios-disucss, it has been revealed > > that there are a bunch of tools on the base system which depend of 'gnu' > > bash, is there any way that could be rectified? or is that issue only > > within omnios and not addressable by the illumos community at large? > > > >>> > > > >>> is there any way the illumos community could get interested in > > shedding it's fat even at the userland level? > > > >> > > > >> Even if many here agree that, e.g., bash (or gnu tools in general) is > > > >> nothing we really want here, you cannot ignore its dominance > > elsewhere, > > > >> especially in the Linux domain where most of the software we like to > > > >> provide also is targeted at nowadays. So if you want to have the > > ability > > > >> to ever compile anything coming from upstream, or even enable your > > users > > > >> to compile other software they download for themselves, you have to > > > >> provide all that "fat" if you don't want to constantly rewrite what > > > >> you've pulled. Whining to upstream about that will do nothing, you > > will > > > >> be simply ignored... That's the reality today, you have to cope with > > > >> that. > > > >> > > > >> The same applies (even more) for python. And ksh93 has been obsoleted > > > >> in Linux, so guess what happens next in the foreseeable future... > > > >> > > > >> If you don't want to be left completely isolated quickly, you have to > > > >> adapt. > > > > > > > > udo, your logic is flawed. > > > > if you think that just because ksh93 being obsoleted under linux > > should be reason enough to move to some other tool like python, then going > > by that rationale, we should all be moving our bases over from illumos to > > linux, yeah right, if you don't want to be left completely isolated > > quickly, you have to adapt! > > > > > > That is exactly what I'm expecting and planning for our group ... > > > they've demanded it for years now. > > > > that would be great going for the illumos community. > > shedding fat as well as those people who aren't genuinely interested in a > > positive future for illumos would go a long way for the overall health of > > the project. > > hope you would be a good person and not bad mouth the project and > > community after you've left. > > > There's never any reason at all to be insulting, and doing so makes you > less likely to get any assistance or cooperation. > > My experience with multiple Linux distros, Illumos, Windows, and FreeBSD is > that you're more likely to have success finding a distribution that does > what you want in the 1st place than trying to pressure an existing project > to do what you want. Especially when there's already been a lot of effort > sunk into *not* doing what you're asking for. > > Having descended from a server OS (OpenSolaris) and hewing fairly close to > Oracle Solaris in capability, Illumos can't reasonably be expected to be > minimal. > > There are many minimal and heavily customizable distros out there, mostly > based on Linux. Raspberry Pi OS (Lite), Arch Linux, Alpine Linux, Puppy > Linux, and Void Linux come to mind. > > I would also encourage you not to equate install ISO (which often contain > the entire base repo for offline installs) size with base install disk and > RAM usage. > > Lastly, even decade-old hardware runs "fat" distros just fine with no > issues, and RAM for those machines is relatively inexpensive and widely > available. I have Debian 10.2 and openSUSE Tumbleweed with KDE running on > 2011 2C/4T machines just fine. judah, you've got it all wrong. i have never pressured anybody or any project to do what i want, just that it's inconceivable to note that something as true-unix as an illumos distribution should use bash as the default interactive login shell for root! i have expressed my anguish on this non-omnios mailing list, if the omnios folks have taken offense, it's really not my problem. on the other hand, if you have taken offense, i really don't see the value in respecting your position because it is totally irrelevant to what i've mentioned. i haven't said anything about "minimal", i have just been questioning the rationale for the excess fat that has accumulated around illumos-based distributions like omnios. in fact, i have stopped using omnios, i use a different illumos distribution now, and it's not because of the fact that they are doing a bad job, it's just that omnios doesn't align with my values and expectations off a true-unix system. ------------------------------------------ illumos: illumos-discuss Permalink: https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/T8b661f3611aef44c-M304b69a8e90d85c3efceb605 Delivery options: https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription
