From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Thu May 31 22:34:59 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4A11F79D7C for ; Thu, 31 May 2018 22:34:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oliver.pinter@hardenedbsd.org) Received: from mail-yb0-x232.google.com (mail-yb0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A8A98463B for ; Thu, 31 May 2018 22:34:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oliver.pinter@hardenedbsd.org) Received: by mail-yb0-x232.google.com with SMTP id x36-v6so8125777ybi.0 for ; Thu, 31 May 2018 15:34:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hardenedbsd-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=owIlGfV0ZgiQ+8u4omudWdSkLBIcRw/cWbABXNN33lA=; b=lXgYNdT5DWSO437BZpolJLcu+h4A4Le+Lfl+wdZVNKV3rdnze9GNkAqKdY4dYe1lVg ERVIQqtF4LWIzFka1KVeSho6wou9MrztNPj6K3aLtMqeRfhy0qZKv6Mrhm94F1SQ0K9E /vfceku47N72yjyrU3ifrzba8QXdNjT2ckGyS4H8iwLdfM5gcqINT1gd0cGGcoIb2vOu e+3M7bIlmKzzYml4OynUyLQsI4gbUHCvZAxQWyw6DBxjofEw/kfgaDp6q9RJ5ojB8pkl DbPIm7C51LchG6a5X0AXkIcZfFnkIWQeb90CaAkyhEQlS5CwzhMrwZl7Jt6TNFzAVzz4 hT/A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=owIlGfV0ZgiQ+8u4omudWdSkLBIcRw/cWbABXNN33lA=; b=NnyT3PPN8bFr8KlH0uwpWPb73pK7GV1LgLxcdOKWokOa8kKepayGRaWKItqNmmbR3T q5giFeJtVEl35Zna3F23L39JLz7p2+4B5wjclCyN7LEgUVXZOa4EnKCb3dFFU1GAjn3E 9omZZkqzsSHc48zkGgXZ3CTKjLbMbEmV++lP6kihbpgI12MDR1CJAt0wkgnRAkZsCvnr LGoJHWsT6SxQsNHAtEZXwk1TFyURH2unDlXfWk43c9ygBb8Q9b2903NXm+OQImNt+eNT OAJl9XsUp033r5s++zjynZ6pCmg2N88ofc9PWm5D/mJTXeMTfdAHD7K9J3jXYL7ElGN4 4RDA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwddNsCo2xPkwN7bMGLdxEv0VE/nFR/LKRhcxk3ZKNdJs8/7aTxe fPMmBRYDX0xVTLh+h2HQgWss0MhwPBrRsW9+JLWRzw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLa+7xmwjqIYb5jAWCX8Mqfn0yY09YCjLac84KiZKJ7N9l06oFUwSOnrQjg0uxt0fYbn2UJVjP8qp2c76Xfhyo= X-Received: by 2002:a25:55d4:: with SMTP id j203-v6mr4845573ybb.199.1527806098288; Thu, 31 May 2018 15:34:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a25:db86:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 31 May 2018 15:34:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20180524160234.GD68014@FreeBSD.org> <201805241610.w4OGAAGY041280@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> <20180530235156.310870d0@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> <20180531101643.GV3789@kib.kiev.ua> From: Oliver Pinter Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 00:34:57 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] Deprecation and removal of the drm2 driver To: Johannes Lundberg Cc: "jmaloney@ixsystems.com" , "deischen@freebsd.org" , Konstantin Belousov , freebsd-current Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.26 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 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: Thu, 31 May 2018 22:34:59 -0000 On Thursday, May 31, 2018, Johannes Lundberg wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:34 PM Joe Maloney > wrote: > > > I personally wish that more drivers, and firmware were separated from > > base. > > > > > I'm not a committer > > If you are not a committer, how and why want to remove drm2 from the base system? >From other side, how you want to maintain VM and other KPI changes in unmaintained and abandoned port? ;) Or how you can guarantee to everyone who breaks KPI to follow these breaks in an external abandoned port? > > but as I understand there's not pre-commit integration > tests.. If one had that, plus that it would test build kmod ports against > the pre-commit state of head as well, then maybe this would work. > > > > For example wireless firmware: > > > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169433 > > > > That was a ticket which I chimed in on about a firmware I needed to make > > my wireless adapter work. I went through numerous efforts on IRC, and > > elsewhere to try to bring attention that ticket in order to attempt to > get > > that firmware backported for several 10.x releases in a row without > > success. The firmware worked perfectly fine in PC-BSD where it was > cherry > > picked for numerous 10.x releases. > > > > Technically since I was using PC-BSD, and was a committer for that > project > > I had no real dire need to reach out to FreeBSD about the issue. I was > > simply trying to help anyone else who might be encountering the same > issue > > trying to use stock FreeBSD because it was a simple backport. If my > effort > > had turned out to be more fruitful I would have spent more time pursuing > > tickets, diffs, or whatever to get more things back-ported when I found > > them. I am not sure where the breakdown was which did not allow that to > > happen. Anyways I don't want to bikeshed, or anything but I just wanted > to > > point out how I think having more drivers, and firmware in ports could be > > helpful to enhance compatibility for end users. > > > > Having a separate port for legacy drm could definitely make things easier > > to providing installation options for end users, and automating the post > > install action chosen in TrueOS, GhostBSD, and future derivative projects > > tailored for the desktop use case. For example for TrueOS we boot the > > installer in failsafe mode with either VESA, or SCFB depending on whether > > or not BIOS, or EFI is booted. Then we could simply make a checkbox for > > legacy intel, or skylake + to install the correct package then the module > > path for either driver can more or less remain the same. Eventually with > > something like devmatch maybe that can even be fully automatic. > > > > Joe Maloney > > > > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Daniel Eischen > > wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 31 May 2018, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 08:34:44AM +0100, Johannes Lundberg wrote: > >>> > >>> We're not replacing anything. We are moving the older drm1 and drm2 > from > >>>> kernel to ports to make it easier for the majority of the users to > load > >>>> the > >>>> correct driver without conflicts. > >>>> > >>> > >>> You do understand that you increase your maintainence load by this > move. > >>> dev/drm and dev/drm2 use KPIs which cannot be kept stable even in > stable > >>> branches, so you will need to chase these updates. > >>> > >> > >> I agree. One argument previously made was that it's easier > >> to maintain in ports. One data point from me - I rarely > >> update my ports, I update my OS much more frequently. In > >> fact, some times my ports get so out of date I just > >> (take off and) nuke /usr/local (from orbit, it's the only > >> way to be sure). > >> > >> Also, are we trying to solve a problem by moving drm[2] to > >> ports that won't be a problem when base is pkg'ized? If > >> drm[2] is a package unto itself, then you don't have this > >> problem of ports conflicting with it, at least not so > >> much. You can either not install the base drm[2] package > >> or deinstall it to make way for a conflicting port. Once > >> drm[2] is pkg rm'd, it's not going to be reinstalled > >> again when you update the base OS. > >> > >> And don't we have the same problem with sendmail and a > >> few other base services? > >> > >> -- > >> DE > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org > >> " > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >