Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 11:52:53 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Cc: Josh Paetzel <jpaetzel@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: open-vm-tools in base Message-ID: <CANCZdfqqBzzLkpNvX%2Bz9Y7EFLqzu%2B7dpFrQetkFCPeJ6TswfQQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20200110183816.GA6857@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <46480be7-b1a1-4da8-97ea-c4b97b0b997c@www.fastmail.com> <20200110172541.GA6529@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <CANCZdfoFNH2CNvJKKsrPYO7ek%2Bnk6H5USiEGv6CwNdm3pdOwag@mail.gmail.com> <20200110183816.GA6857@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:38 AM Steve Kargl < sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:44:38AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:26 AM Steve Kargl < > > sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 09:55:23AM -0600, Josh Paetzel wrote: > > > > > > > > There is some precedent for this. Driver(s?) that were once a > > > > part of the tools have been moved to base already. The VMXNET3 > > > > driver is an example of this. > > > > > > > > > > There is also precedent for removing a working driver from > > > base and putting it into ports. See drm2. > > > > > > > Not the best example to cite as there's been a lot of bumps with that and > > the future distribution model is unclear to me. > > > > Oddly enough I disagree. :-) > You're not on the front lines of fighting the impedance mismatch between package builds, -current changes and ports that depend a bit too much on our internals, either implicitly or explicitly. :) > Does the problems for open-vm-tools occur in freebsd-stable, > where the kernel ABI should be stable? > Except they aren't. virtualbox's kmod have issues as does kms-drm because we have no tools to test our KBI stability, so we encode a lot of internal junk we shouldn't and that causes breakages on the branch that are tricky to even known exist. > Freebsd-current is the development tree, and kernel changes > might break 3rd party software. drm2 is a perfect example. > In-base drm2 was working just fine and kept up-to-date with > kernel changes when it was attached to the build. This seems > to be what Josh wants for open-vm-tools. Once drm2 was detached > from the build it was ocassionally broken, and someone (often > times me) would find and report the breakage. If open-vm-tools > is added to base, and then someone adds emulators/open-vm-tools-devel > which supercedes in-base open-vm-tool, we're back to the in-base drm2 > situation. > The notion is that we'd not do that. It would all be in base. > Finally, open-vm-tools is used by what percentage of FreeBSD users? > 1%? 5%? 50%? > Without real data, it's hard to say. What percentage of people in FreeBSD use the ahd driver these days? I'll bet it's a lot less than would use this. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfqqBzzLkpNvX%2Bz9Y7EFLqzu%2B7dpFrQetkFCPeJ6TswfQQ>