From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 29 21:57:52 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8A38BAC for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 21:57:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ebusiness-leidinger.de (mail.ebusiness-leidinger.de [217.11.53.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3882319C5 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 21:57:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (pD9FBB16E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.251.177.110]) by mail.ebusiness-leidinger.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3AF1B84413F; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 22:57:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from unknown (Titan.Leidinger.net [192.168.1.17]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D7D3BA3; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 22:57:35 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1391032655; bh=EfmchlJgT28XzA1taSG6NhOSS4IPn3KadzhK3IhBKmQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Nhr25yD/uQu77qz8MjL/F/+khtUHCybDXBbnWNuLVsKHJ6Gg2++WhfPG4epMK1HeL 1s3e1DLodPGM9yML8NG4Nq2+pcN2L/1SqndT2r4CVThjZ8yycOq8v8+qk0iEd0/sVN gTSiRn3fkakgdFkBvL6JHceW/VAJ2Oyocufyx28hR/8PdUks5VY1xhfKpIiT05Ev3E RXvv9WmqYneic3yLK1u0mNkO51Lz3dh6/oraUyJVXVMTs3prDe88AAiViD809Mb62R H/bwQLGpk0ypr7Hx//adyO60i8TghAdvnb9ymONrxrIHduYEZFMKOHV5tuX3S59mHX Avbz4arPONqpQ== Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 22:57:36 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Yuri Subject: Re: linuxolator: ... not implemented Message-ID: <20140129225736.00007899@unknown> In-Reply-To: <52E3755E.9070900@rawbw.com> References: <52DF6D7E.8080703@rawbw.com> <52E0CA90.1040602@rawbw.com> <20140124231646.0000658d@unknown> <52E3755E.9070900@rawbw.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.2-55-g74b05b (GTK+ 2.16.6; i586-pc-mingw32msvc) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EBL-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-EBL-MailScanner-ID: 3AF1B84413F.A0EAE X-EBL-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-EBL-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, spamhaus-ZEN, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-1.017, required 6, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.00, AWL 0.08, DKIM_SIGNED 0.10, DKIM_VALID -0.10, DKIM_VALID_AU -0.10, RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.00) X-EBL-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-EBL-MailScanner-Watermark: 1391637458.69555@wDOoC2WTqEOoS18b71C5AA X-EBL-Spam-Status: No Cc: "freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 21:57:52 -0000 On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 00:27:10 -0800 Yuri wrote: > On 01/24/2014 14:16, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > Some comments regarding the linux packages: > > - the goal with the linux_base ports is to switch from Fedora to > > CentOS > > - the linux_base ports are not designed for the use with chroot > > - the linux_dist port can be used with chroot > > - do you mind to give the linux_base-c6 port a try and maybe even > > use it as a base for your development? > > But linux_base is a repackaging of the various linux shared libraries > into yet another package. Why even bother doing this, if this all is > already pre-packaged by linux folks? To use one tool to rule them all (= if you want to install software on FreeBSD, use the FreeBSD package management tool). Apart from that, please investigate more deeply what the linux_base ports are doing, one eample: - NOT packaging files which are available in the linux package to fall through to the FreeBSD files in the same location - replacing linux files with symlinks/wrappers to use the corresponding FreeBSD functionality Both of them result in re-using FreeBSD infrastructure to lessen the need to do some config inside the linux area to have it configured the same way as FreeBSD. > CentOS also uses rpm/yum, just like Fedora. The difference is merely > a repository string for yum. I am not sure if this will practically The difference which was important for us is that the Fedora has a faster turn-around time with new versions than CentOS. We don't have the man-power to cope with the fast release cycle of Fedora. > even make any difference at all, stock Fedora vs. stock CentOS. I can > install any rpm package in fewer lines of code than in a Makefile of > linux_base-c6. > > User side done this way works like a charm. Most work is to implement Off-course, but what you are doing is a linux_dist setup (plain vanilla linux, OK to chroot into), not a linux_base setup (a FreeBSD-blended-linux, NOT OK to chroot into because of missing configs as there is no fall-through to FreeBSD config files). > missing kernel features, and some yet unexplained malfunctions. > Missing futex operations being one of them, but there are quite a few > others. One known problem in the futex area is (attention: this is IIRC!) that futexes don't work after a fork(), but we don't know how often this is used or if it is used at all. Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137