Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:26:32 +0200 From: "C. P. Ghost" <cpghost@cordula.ws> To: David Jackson <djackson452@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem Message-ID: <CADGWnjVD5m%2BMCAJa%2B1XzsC8_2hhtex2T7MZJ9xTX4VD0XXQ4Ww@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAGy-%2Bi8ue9r7FJsE8=0hGyjCuTAfNAo=5X46P5pnGT%2BUUQc3Tg@mail.gmail.com> References: <20120822102956.GA43074@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <20120822110356.GA91189@kontrol.kode5.net> <CAGy-%2Bi8ue9r7FJsE8=0hGyjCuTAfNAo=5X46P5pnGT%2BUUQc3Tg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:41 PM, David Jackson <djackson452@gmail.com> wrote: > That sort of shows my point in fact. There is nothing stopping FreeBSD from > implementing cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, its not like > Linux is going to enforce patents on these things, its software, and > freebsd can easily add code to support these things, and as well, systemd. Right! Nothing prevents us from writing a Linux compat shim similar to the Linux-ABI (linuxulator) to provide the framework needed by systemd et al. Make it optional, if necessary, so that the base default FreeBSD system won't be contaminated. It would also be nice to be able to kldload linux drivers (binary blobs developed for Linux and provided by 3rd party hardware vendors), but that would be harder to implement. Then again, why not try? Isn't it like ndis(4), all over again? -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADGWnjVD5m%2BMCAJa%2B1XzsC8_2hhtex2T7MZJ9xTX4VD0XXQ4Ww>