From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 19 22:57:49 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FC41106566B; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 22:57:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ob0-f182.google.com (mail-ob0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DC928FC15; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 22:57:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obcni5 with SMTP id ni5so1104197obc.13 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:57:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gEKNenHvgPG4oE8fj4rzLsYnn967LKIpyG0n/ExcXsg=; b=pc5Iy6uTCswUH507Vuys2ljOZUSmKzkc0vqhGLnAh7it+OLUT76sAzoB+BJrvLdjHA T5cpNQ3ZzE3QozcDDMF5H4A6vXmPGUDdO/tz2CATa8vUO69cEnl4x7p+IHb8u65e/MOx MOkK2tgxyEoWFWzT/N5nP+lscFqKA3/gDmjYYWjB9V61KW7+Z98pQemKTOfLy5B9R4kX R5oDv4C3Cjx5fXg9CDZSN6w6HbW8lhuhGBvk2WH6QkLGJatO6u4JNe6nNHU5u/l8jtdT NDtoPJLcI/++Lx04eEkPzeqAo36KIZBOOqEXacQS3whNxiqgG4ULwe4K/QlIWFvSJ6K2 hJfw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.2.3 with SMTP id 3mr21756541oeq.29.1340146663473; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:57:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.98.77 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:57:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4FE100F9.2050009@funtoo.org> References: <20120615124849.GI96212@ass.kameli.org> <20120618081140.GK96212@ass.kameli.org> <4FDF6177.5050608@unsane.co.uk> <4FDF6586.9060501@gentoo.org> <4FDFB166.2040709@FreeBSD.org> <4FDFB44D.9090308@gentoo.org> <4FE0ADCD.9010109@FreeBSD.org> <4FE0C123.8030301@gentoo.org> <4FE0F773.1080403@gentoo.org> <4FE100F9.2050009@funtoo.org> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:57:43 -0700 Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: Richard Yao Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Doug Barton , "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" , Richard Yao , Vincent Hoffman , Nathan Whitehorn , Outback Dingo , openrc@gentoo.org, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Atte_Peltom=E4ki?= Subject: Re: Replacing rc(8) (Was: FreeBSD Boot Times) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 22:57:49 -0000 On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Richard Yao wrote: > On 06/19/2012 06:17 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Richard Yao wrote: >>> On 06/19/2012 04:12 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Richard Yao wrote: >>>>> On 06/19/2012 12:50 PM, Doug Barton wrote: >>>>>> On 6/18/2012 4:05 PM, Richard Yao wrote: >>>>>>> Doug, we already have OpenRC implemented. You can install Gentoo Fr= eeBSD >>>>>>> in a jail, install regular FreeBSD in another jail and do your own >>>>>>> performance comparisons. >>>>>> >>>>>> Bzzzzzzzzt! Thanks for playing. :) =A0You're the one proposing the c= hange, >>>>>> YOU get to do the performance comparisons. If you want a rough idea = of >>>>>> what I personally would consider to be a robust test, don't hesitate= to >>>>>> ask. I'm sure others would have ideas as well. >>>>> >>>>> Would you elaborate on what you consider to be a robust test? I reall= y >>>>> have no idea. >>>> >>>> =A0 =A0 It might be an ok smoke test, but it's hardly a realistic >>>> test/comparison as the pseudo startup for a jail and a real system >>>> aren't close to being the same (this is in part because of how jails >>>> function). >>> >>> Would you elaborate on what you consider to be acceptable? Honestly, I >>> am not certain if you will appreciate any tests unless you do them your= self. >> >> Change /etc/rc to use OpenRC in the base system. >> -Garrett > > That is already done in Gentoo FreeBSD, or do you want me to do the work > for you to integrate OpenRC in the base system? > > I already have OpenRC in Gentoo FreeBSD. Taking the time to integrate > OpenRC into FreeBSD would be an inefficient use of my time. Not only > would I fail to gain any improvements on my systems, but I would divert > development time from things that do benefit me. > > People can use Gentoo FreeBSD in jails (or on physical hardware) to do > comparisons. If they like it, Gentoo's developers are willing to help, > but you cannot expect us to do your work for you. That would be like > asking the Clang developers to replace your system compiler or the > Illumos developers to replace your file system. > > FreeBSD's developers need to be the ones to import OpenRC into FreeBSD's > base system, not us. We will just fix problems you encounter and > collaborate on improvements. That is what every other upstream does. No. I'm saying that this is what would need to be done to qualify it and it would need to be run with the base system and a series of rc scripts in ports. In order for things to ultimately be committed, things would need to be regression tested enough that FreeBSD developers would be confident with the end-result. And yes, there would need to be a conversion plan, documentation update, and the full nine yards for whatever's done with an rc replacement, as this would impact a lot of folks and projects. Thanks, -Garrett