Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 17:23:33 -0700 From: Devin Teske <dteske@FreeBSD.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: Devin Teske <dteske@FreeBSD.org>, Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r334939 - head/stand/lua Message-ID: <B2A41A7C-F18B-44B4-A75C-FE42E4A6D128@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfpDu4K0qdQt670px6VAsKM0a_pP4tbCtH2Vk0Ou80szzg@mail.gmail.com> References: <201806110132.w5B1WI5d094546@repo.freebsd.org> <E6FA26B8-63CF-4927-AE20-644D985BACD8@freebsd.org> <CANCZdfrtK_Cn1N2RE=f5DS_UNLq6C493LUNwQoHvYX06noVZxg@mail.gmail.com> <344AA709-2DF7-405C-AB4D-4F0978834EA1@FreeBSD.org> <CANCZdfpDu4K0qdQt670px6VAsKM0a_pP4tbCtH2Vk0Ou80szzg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Jun 11, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 11:54 AM, Devin Teske <dteske@freebsd.org = <mailto:dteske@freebsd.org>> wrote: >=20 >> On Jun 11, 2018, at 7:07 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com = <mailto:imp@bsdimp.com>> wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 7:36 AM, Devin Teske <dteske@freebsd.org = <mailto:dteske@freebsd.org>> wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> > On Jun 10, 2018, at 6:32 PM, Kyle Evans <kevans@FreeBSD.org = <mailto:kevans@FreeBSD.org>> wrote: >> >=20 >> > Author: kevans >> > Date: Mon Jun 11 01:32:18 2018 >> > New Revision: 334939 >> > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/334939 = <https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/334939>; >> >=20 >> > Log: >> > lualoader: Allow brand-*.lua for adding new brands >> >=20 >> > dteske@, I believe, had originally pointed out that lualoader = failed to >> > allow logo-*.lua for new logos to be added. When correcting this = mistake, I >> > failed to do the same for brands. >> >=20 >>=20 >> You=E2=80=99re doing an amazing job, Kyle. >>=20 >> I continually see nothing but genuine effort toward feature parity = which makes me think one day I can pass the reigns. >>=20 >> Yeah, I will always love Forth. It will always hold a special place = in my heart as that whacky language that simultaneously exudes great = power while also having the image ability to induce vomiting =F0=9F=A4=AE = by the uninitiated. >>=20 >> However, all that being said, I=E2=80=99d actually like to keep the = Ficl boot stuff as an option through to 14.0 and here is why ... >>=20 >> Last year we were looking to update from ficl3 to ficl4. That may not = sound too exciting to most folks, but most folks don=E2=80=99t know the = power that ficl4 brings =E2=80=94 like the capability to use full = networking in the loader! Can lua do that? How cool would it be to be = able to communicate with the network from the loader before the kernel = is even loaded into memory? I had a few hair-brained schemes left for = Forth which might be exciting, lol >>=20 >> The current boot loader can already communicate via NFS or TFTP = today. Adding http would be easy, https would be harder due to crypto = being huge and space being small (though bear ssl might be small = enough). >>=20 >> The last articulated plan in arch@ was that LUA will be default in = 12, and we plan to remove FORTH in 13. Last time I said it there in = February, there was only email agreeing that I could find. This matches = the in-person consensus poll I took at BSDcan as well. I think it would = take a very extraordinary set circumstance and severe problems with LUA = to change those plans. >>=20 >=20 > At BSD Can there was the boot working group where we discussed that an = FCP would be required to decide this. >=20 > In the working group you weren't listening and being rather combative = and demanding that I do stuff, I think that's an unfair characterization of the situation, but it = doesn't matter -- that's your opinion and you are entitled to it. > so I stopped talking. Hopefully we can _start_ talking. As the principled author of this work, = I want to have a say in its deprecation since I still maintain that body = of work. > It should not be taken as a sign of my consent, but more a sign of not = wanting to get into a yelling match in public on a topic I thought had = been settled months ago. >=20 Nobody asked *me* about how I would like to see *my* work removed from = the tree. I think I should have a say. I think I've been pretty darn helpful in the process by providing = substantive and helpful feedback to not only Kyle but also on the GSoC = project etc. I've not stood in any ones way. For being so helpful, I = would expect a level respect in this matter. > I raised my desires that I would like to be able to flip a knob in 13 = and reboot between Ficl and Lua, back and forth. >=20 > Give people a choice until we have done a "shake-out" through an = entire major version. >=20 > An honest-to-goodness procession would be, in my mind: >=20 > 13: Has both; both are installed. End-user can boot back and forth = between the two >=20 > Problems that arise in one or the other are non-critical because there = is always an "out" by running the other. >=20 > 14: Has both but both are not installed. The installer media doesn't = even have it. You can't install the Forth booth stuff unless you twist a = knob in buildworld, optionally going down the path of generating release = media which has the Forth boot stuff. >=20 > 15. It's removed from tree. You can't build Forth boot. Lua only. No = looking back, no way to build it with Forth, to get Ficl you need to go = to ports. A Ficl with FreeBSD boot words no longer exists and is no = longer maintained. All of bhyve userboot also therefore uses Lua. >=20 > That's way too long. 12 will have Lua by default, but you can build = FORTH if you want has been the plan since February when I socialized = this on arch@. I originally pitched coexistence, but there was little = appetite for that. >=20 > So I think a FCP discussed in arch@ is the right path forward. >=20 We sat on the GSoC for years. Why all of a sudden do we need to ship = this in less than 6 months? There are new features in Forth for 12 and they work and Lua has not = caught up to them (e.g., Boot Environments in the loader menu) and you = want to make Lua the default in 12? This doesn't make sense. The timeline I suggested is more amenable to actually crossing the = finish line with a fully-functional drop-in replacement. --=20 Devin=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B2A41A7C-F18B-44B4-A75C-FE42E4A6D128>