Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 13:17:34 +0200 From: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl> To: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> Cc: Allen Briggs <briggs@ninthwonder.com>, tech-kern@netbsd.org, Andy Doran <ad@netbsd.org>, Eivind Eklund <eivind@FreeBSD.org>, current@freebsd.org, tech@openbsd.org Subject: Re: Suspend/resume hooks Message-ID: <19990627131734.A23920@daemon.ninth-circle.org> In-Reply-To: <199906270415.WAA08274@harmony.village.org>; from Warner Losh on Sat, Jun 26, 1999 at 10:15:19PM -0600 References: <19990626235842.F1063@canolog.ninthwonder.com> <199906270415.WAA08274@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Warner Losh (imp@harmony.village.org) [990627 09:02]: [Excuse my posting this to multiple lists, but I cannot let this go unnoticed] > In message <19990626235842.F1063@canolog.ninthwonder.com> Allen Briggs writes: > : Ideally, there should be no more unnecessary divergence of the APIs--it > : would also be nice to work toward removing any API differences that there > : are now (no matter where they came from, what discussions have taken place, > : or what body parts have been scorched in the past). I know that's a lot > : easier said than done, but I'd be surprised if this isn't what most > : people would like to see. Allen, you are correct. I think that there's a lot to benefit any three of the BSD's from the other. > I know that I'm working on newconfig shims for FreeBSD's new-bus > system and am running into many stupid, trivial errors in doing > that... I'd like to see these areas minimized where it makes sense > and it technical and politically possible to do so. I couldn't agree more on that Warner. > If there is interest in cataloging these differences and trying to > resolve them, I hereby volunteer to setup mailing lists to facilitate > that process. Like I said, I was already busy doing that, albeit slowly, but getting there eventually... Also, a few BSD developers have already been dabbling in userland synchronisation and are still doing that, albeit, as I said before, slowly. > It would be nice if NetBSD's core and FreeBSD's core > would approve, in principle, a statement that says that they generally > support reduction in the differences in API between the two systems, > but resolution of said differences will be handled on a case by case > basis. And OpenBSD's core. > Basically, a "we like the idea in principle, but we'll reserve > the right to veto anything that is too radical." True, that's the best approach, but like I pointed out in another mail, we need to be careful not to bring out old things. Let the past just be the past and concentrate on the future in which this, the API cleanup/ synchronisation, will play an important role. > Since I'm not a member of either core group, I'm not sure what the > best way to proceed here would be. The only comparable `projects' I can name in this aspect Warner, is the Linux Standard Base, POSIX, and the Single Un*x Specification. http://www.linuxbase.org http://www.opengroup.org/austin > Comments? You got my support Warner, actually you took my ideas a little further, I was merely documenting the differences, and you want to get them straightened out as much as possible. I don't think any core-team can deny the importance of a somewhat consistent base API (on multiple areas) in order to keep porting from FreeBSD to NetBSD, or from OpenBSD to FreeBSD to a minimum fuzz. This could also allow us to try to create a driver system that would make exchanging device drivers a breeze. And that would benefit us all... -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven asmodai(at)wxs.nl The *BSD Programmer's Documentation Project Network/Security Specialist <http://home.wxs.nl/~asmodai>; *BSD: We are back and will not accept no... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990627131734.A23920>