Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 12:36:44 +0200 From: Dan Partelly <dan_partelly@rdsor.ro> To: Peter Beckman <beckman@angryox.com> Cc: Dmitry Sivachenko <trtrmitya@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@ntlworld.com>, Mark Heily <mark@heily.com> Subject: Re: relaunchd: a portable clone of launchd Message-ID: <07D83705-D89F-4125-B57B-920EDEBC8A85@rdsor.ro> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1601081020270.34827@nog2.angryox.com> References: <5687D3A9.5050400@NTLWorld.com> <CAGfo=8kXzNVKy9gx0jkME4iRRyrgrsfpPnW3nYrZC0gysapPcg@mail.gmail.com> <817860B6-5D67-41A3-ADD7-9757C7E67C35@gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.20.1601081020270.34827@nog2.angryox.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Copying the linux way of doing things should not be a goal of the BSDs. It is enough that unfortunately we are forced into Linuxisms and associated wrappers to support modern GPUs. Understandable , given how few ppl work on BSDs, and how little code contributions do the BSDs receive from the massive enterprises they power (with some notable exceptions) Let me use this opportunity to thank Juniper for the glorified printf system they contributed to FreeBSD . Can the BSDs go forward with rc systems alone ? Sure they can , at least for the time beeing, and we will continue to use them. But innovation is desirable. Systemd might be a terrible implementation or not (I dont know, I dont use it) but the ideas behind it are sane. rc systems are indeed robust, but they should be ancient history. They are nothing but glorified autoexec.bat systems. Modern OSes need sophisticated dynamic service management systems, fault management, transactional OS configuration databases, centralised event systems supporting kernel sources. This is the problem domain things like sytemd and dbus are tring to solve. They might doit the wrong way, I personally think the direction Solaris took to solve some of those problems is the way to go, but at least they are trying to do something, and they clearly explored the problem space. Meanwhile here, some engineers are trying to change the FreeBSD OS configuration to a new DSL, but without any consideration for issues of centralising OS databases and add innovation like transactions and full concurrency safety. YOu gotta ask yourself, since it is only a language change, why even doit ????? It adds no technical innovations, the new systems are not well enough thought out to support technical innovation added incrementally later. So why are they doing it ? To change the DSL only ? By now all BSDs user are familiar with all adhoc databases the OS offer. We are familiar (experts, even) with the language they use. Changing this language , when no technical innovation is present, is , in my opinion, ill-advised. It is change for the sake of change, it is change because “someone wrote the code”, not because it solves any real problem , or is a well thought out engineering solution. I really hope someone from the developers wakes up and vetoes those changes for the sake of change, like Junipers libxo, and attemtps to change the DSLs for the sake of changing the DSL. > On 08 Jan 2016, at 17:20, Peter Beckman <beckman@angryox.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote: > >> >>> On 07 Jan 2016, at 05:12, Mark Heily <mark@heily.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard >>> <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@ntlworld.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I recommend, to anyone going down this route, looking towards finishing >>>> systembsd, especially instead of inventing a wholly new suite of protocols. >>>> >>>> * https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systembsd.git >>>> * >>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/debian-systemd-packaging-hoo-hah.html >>>> * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10176275 >>>> >>>> The reason is that finishing systemdbsd will make happy all of the people >>>> who want the desktop environments whose design is driven largely by Linux to >>>> work on FreeBSD/PC-BSD. The desktop environments that they'd like to use >>>> have been or are being modified to work with these daemons, over this D-Bus >>>> protocol. >>>> >>> >>> I strongly disagree with your recommendation to adopt DBus and systemd >>> as core components of FreeBSD. >>> >>> From a practical perspective, the proposal has a low probability of >>> success. Systemd is written for Linux and is largely driven by a >>> commercial Linux vendor. It is a rapidly moving target, with no sense >>> of scope or boundaries. It eagerly consumes the latest and greatest >>> innovations in the Linux kernel, with open disdain for portability. >>> >>> From a philosophical perspective, I don't agree with the direction >>> that systemd is taking Linux. It's one of the reasons I switched to >>> BSD after many years in the Linux camp. To quote Spock, "Logic clearly >>> dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few". In >>> case of FreeBSD, this means that the needs of the desktop users should >>> not outweigh the needs of the server/jail/embedded/appliance users. My >>> concern with systemd and DBus is that these tools are highly >>> desktop-centric, and introduce a large degree of unwanted change, >>> complexity, and risk to everyone else. >> >> >> I totally agree. >> >> systemd is an ugly beast, solving simple problem in complex way. >> >> After using FreeBSD's rc system for years, I think that switching to something systemd-related would be huge mistake. >> No reason to clone everything that happens in Linux world. > > Utterly and strongly agreed. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Peter Beckman Internet Guy > beckman@angryox.com <mailto:beckman@angryox.com> http://www.angryox.com/ <http://www.angryox.com/>; > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>; > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org>"help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?07D83705-D89F-4125-B57B-920EDEBC8A85>