From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 12 10:10:38 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5019216A41F for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:10:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from MH@kernel32.de) Received: from crivens.unixoid.de (crivens.unixoid.de [81.169.171.191]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC28B43D46 for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:10:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from MH@kernel32.de) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by crivens.unixoid.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB0E541D2; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:10:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from crivens.unixoid.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (crivens.unixoid.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 43075-03; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:10:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.38.0.120] (unknown [213.238.63.253]) by crivens.unixoid.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E38E641C8; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:10:31 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <43C62C24.2090109@kernel32.de> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:15:00 +0100 From: Marian Hettwer User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jo Rhett References: <43A266E5.3080103@samsco.org> <200512231136.12471.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20060105092448.GH1358@svcolo.com> <200601061120.14707.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20060106112329.GG54324@svcolo.com> <43BE6226.5000103@kernel32.de> <20060112074557.GH84964@svcolo.com> In-Reply-To: <20060112074557.GH84964@svcolo.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at unixoid.de Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fast releases demand binary updates.. (Was: Release schedule for 2006) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:10:38 -0000 Hej there, Jo Rhett wrote: > On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 01:27:18PM +0100, Marian Hettwer wrote: > >>I'm actually wondering how yahoo for instance handles this situation. To >>my knowledge, they have several thousand of FreeBSD based servers. >>Either they are all the same in regards to configuration and version, or >>they have some other cunning way to solve the issue of patching. > > > Yahoo has a very similar implementation to ours from what I grok, but they > aren't happy about releasing their implementation into the wild so I can't > say for sure. > a pity. 'cause I bet there would be some nice ideas. > >>Generally speaking: Your statement is true. You don't start writing code >>without an agreement that the direction choosen is a direction where >>FreeBSD wants to evolve. >>However, you (as in, you as a developer) could come up with a proof of >>concept. Start with an implementation like you would like to have it. >>And even if it's just a piece of paper and some code. > > > Before we plan the invasion of Iraq, how about an agreement on what we're > trying to accomplish? Like I said, this topic has always been killed Please stop with these political statements. They have nothing to do with the topic you're stressing here. Just stop these political statements, please :) > because "non-newbies can run make buildworld". So if it's going to get > shot down quickly then why bother? > Why bother? Because you do see a need for binary updates and you do want to change something. So get started with it. Just write a piece of paper (webpage, whatever), maybe even start coding something. Come up with this paper on freebsd-arch (like stated by someone else) and see wether you can find some agreements. > Frankly, that's pretty much where it has gone. Everyone who cares about > this has privately mailed me saying "it would be nice" but nobody believes > that we can get this accepted for inclusion. > Well, I wouldn't be sure. When perl was removed from base and made optional there was some roaring around too. Nevertheless it was removed from base and is no longer needed to run FreeBSD. > I've tried to make the point clear, and ignore the insults and try to keep > on topic... but it's pretty much a lost point already. Everyone loves to > say "you're an idiot" or "your ideas [taken out of context] are wrong" etc > and such forth. > I was following this thread on -current and frankly, I couldn't see any "you're an idiot" statements. Prove me wrong ( by copy 'n paste of the statement in addition with the sender of that mail ). > >>Then start this thread over again, fine tune the concept and hopefully >>some others will jump aboard and help developing. >>I would like to, but I do lack knowledge in C. Shell and a wee bit of >>Perl is fine. Definitly too few knowledge for a project like that :-/ > > > If it really was a project, just a willingness to test this across a range > of environments and the ability to do-one-thing-at-a-time and read log > files would be great assistance. But given zero interest in the project > expressed so far, this is cart years before horse has evolved. > Then my statement would be again: Yes, I would agree that binary updates could make updating FreeBSD easier. However, there are other ways (apart from using make world). I would think about "make release". This is a way to go. Build your custom releases and roll 'em out. Granted, using own releases is only good if you have like one or two architectures (say i386 and amd64). > >>That statement ain't true. If the code solves your problem, fine. If it >>solves problems of others too, even better. Chances are higher that it >>doesn't get ignored... > > > Code that doesn't solve the problem correctly should be rejected with a > reason. Ignorance advances nothing. No replies/no updates = ignorance. > And no commits means the problem isn't solved. > so far, so true. However, just start your project and ask later on for support. best regards, Marian