Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 13:44:01 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> To: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, 'freebsd-arch' <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Retiring in-tree GDB Message-ID: <20151021104401.GK42243@zxy.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <5626B994.1030708@FreeBSD.org> References: <2678091.es0AGJQ0Ou@ralph.baldwin.cx> <5626B15C.4080408@FreeBSD.org> <1445377905.99375.22.camel@freebsd.org> <5626B994.1030708@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:00:52PM -0700, Bryan Drewery wrote: > >>> criteria: > >>> > >>> 1) devel/gdb works including thread and kgdb support > >>> 2) lldb works > > > > This just-won't-die meme that a "functional system" is nothing more > > than a bare kernel and an init binary and everything else comes from > > ports is extra-scary when you consider that ports can't even be (cross > > -)built for some architectures. > > > > It sucks that the project is adopting the mindset that the only way to > > compete with linux is to become linux. (And it sucks that installing a > > truly functional system will require end users to have roughly the same > > knowledge as the team that assembles a linux distro.) > > It's not about Linux. It's about not providing the same thing twice on > the system. It's about not having 2 different compilers on the system. > Using ports on older releases means the base compiler is too outdated to > build from ports and is thus not used. We have so much redundancy before > /usr and /usr/local once you install packages or try to build from > ports. There's no sane reason for that. > > In a world of a packaged base the default install should still mostly > match what we have now for POLA. Just that it is contained in packages. > My point here is that removing something is argument #1, adding > something is argument #2. > > No one is seriously suggesting we provide a DVD with init, libc, rtld, > libthr and a kernel only. That may be "a package" which is considered > very critical and special, but it would be among many other packages. > > Yes we need cross-compiling in ports. We also need more native build > servers in the cluster to provide packages. Currently, ports, need to compile gcc49, have run depend of whole gcc49. This is not 'less compile'. And may cause many problems if outdated compiler will be conflict with new compiler. Base system now act as fixit bootrom: independed from application, all-sufficient, full functional and always consistent.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20151021104401.GK42243>