From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 14:41:46 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2BCCB14592; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:41:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37791F95; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:41:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-2.local (unknown [IPv6:2601:645:8003:a4d6:8899:e9c:e753:74e4]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BAC58346DE30; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:41:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: dan_partelly References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> <57164068.8080800@freebsd.org> <78fb431d2d9b568fd488fae51a1b5f23@rdsor.ro> Cc: Julian Elischer , lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Alfred Perlstein Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <571643A8.9020702@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:41:44 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <78fb431d2d9b568fd488fae51a1b5f23@rdsor.ro> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:41:47 -0000 On 4/19/16 7:39 AM, dan_partelly wrote: >> What should not happen is that this incremental step forward be blocked >> by those unwilling to hash out the next steps. >> >> -Alfred >> >> > While incremental steps forward are great, how do you avoid situations > like VNET, where a "good enough" enough implementation, usable in some > scenarios lingered for years in kernel, but to this day it suffers from > leaks and bugs. Once you go down the path of enabling it in this state, > chances are that it will stay that way for more than half a decade. > > > > > We happened to use VNET at our last company with great success. Had it not existed we would have been much further away from our goals. Maybe you picked a bad example? :) Look, take a look at history and the Linux kernel threads story and its impact on FreeBSD. If you'd like I can talk about it. -Alfred