From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sun Nov 15 20:04:22 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 727A7A30188 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 20:04:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from mail.rdsor.ro (mail.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3200B1FA0 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 20:04:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (unknown [79.119.24.18]) by mail.rdsor.ro (Postfix) with ESMTP id D075512102; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 22:04:20 +0200 (EET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.1 \(3096.5\)) Subject: Re: libXO-ification - Why - and is it a symptom of deeper issues? From: Dan Partelly In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 22:04:20 +0200 Cc: freebsd-current Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <0650CA79-5711-44BF-AC3F-0C5C5B6E5BD9@rdsor.ro> <702A1341-FB0C-41FA-AB95-F84858A7B3A4@rdsor.ro> To: Adrian Chadd X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3096.5) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 20:04:22 -0000 > It's all fine and good making technical decisions based on drawings > and handwaving and philosophizing, but at some point someone has to do > the code. HI Adrian, . What I eluded too is not a small project. It is something that would = need proper discussion and agreement, since it would be pervasive and = touch=20 critical parts of the OS, such as the init system, system config = databases , and add proper services management facility. It would also = benefit=20 from a new form of kernel IPC. It would need consensus from FreeBSD = board or whatever to have any chance of even starting up. Nobody in his=20= sane mind would start it otherwise. Most likely he would work in vain, =20 And when consensus that something HAS to be done will exist, and from = empty discussion you would have a implementation plan, when maybe the = FreeBSD foundation would get involved and sponsor such a important = project to see it done to the end. And there are efforts today to go down the path I mentioned, NextBSD is = the incarnation of such an effort. And while they offer code and they do = make progress I do not seeing anyone in FreeBSD beeing too eager to = commit that code :P (Im not saying that you should adapt launchd and add = another comapt layer for FreeBSD for mach ). I for one like what Solaris = does. What Im saying that such work would never be possible directly in = FreeBSD, because lack of consensus that anything serious should be done, = apart from patching on sides. I am saying that gathering consensus that something has to be done must = exist before any code is written . Else you wont get much.=