Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 11:02:14 +0100 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@scc.nl> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux collections (was: Linux devel doesn't work with glibc libs) Message-ID: <36B97026.8D786493@scc.nl> References: <199902040002.QAA09939@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Smith wrote: > > Now the downsides to using the FreeBSD RPM: > > - it's not installed in /bin. That's where RedHat puts it, and it's > where anything that interacts with the RedHat package database wants > it. (eg. The IBM DB2 installer). Good point. > - its databases don't end up in the canonical place (because that > would be stupid on FreeBSD). Could be... > - it doesn't run in Linux compataility mode, so it won't see things in > the /compat/linux tree, nor will it install things there. Why not? just specify '--root /compat/linux'. > There's basically no good reason to use the FreeBSD RPM port, and lots > of good reasons not to. I went through the process of evaluating both > approaches while I was trying to get DB2 installed, and while the > RedHat binary doesn't work 100% right either, the FreeBSD binary was > definitely going to lead to more heartache. Hmmm... Red Hat RPM it's gonna be, then. [snipped some collection talk] > > linux-ports: FreeBSD ports of linux-specific tools (such as ps(1)) (needs > > linux) > > If just installing the RPM is enough, these should be in the runtime. > If they're from-source ports, then they want to be separate, indeed. > The question here is whether they should be FreeBSD binaries installed > in /compat/linux, or whether they should be build using the linux > compatibility code. Ick. Wherever possible we should extend our > emulation so that the Linux-native tools work of course. My ps(1) port uses -lkvm. Other ports may need sysctl. In short they have to be FreeBSD binaries emulating the behaviour of Linux binaries. [another big snip] > > I'd KISS for now; just runtime and development. The development stuff > is enormous of course (tools, includes, static libs, manpages, etc.), > but the runtime won't bloat all that badly even with the X stuff > installed. I do not entirely agree, but let's get the show on the road. We can always finetune later if that's at all necessary of course. Consensus: 1. I create a port called Linux, which uses the Red Hat RPM and checks for linux.ko but not automaticly load it and it will be somewhat equivalent to linux_lib. 2. A second port will be called Linux-devel which depends on Linux and will somewhat equal linux_devel. 3. Other ports will be discussed later. marcel To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-emulation" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36B97026.8D786493>