Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 00:06:33 -0700 (MST) From: Brett Taylor <brett@peloton.physics.montana.edu> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD emulation for linux Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903222309360.5750-100000@peloton.physics.montana.edu> In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.32.19990322221248.03ebdf10@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brett,
On Mon, 22 Mar 1999, Brett Glass wrote:
> At 10:07 PM 3/22/99 -0700, Brett Taylor wrote:
>
> >You've suggested the following things that I remember recently:
> >
> > - that the Linux emulator has been bad for FreeBSD
> It has. Unequivocally. Oh, a few people have found it useful as
> a stopgap, but it is the ultimate reason for developers NEVER to
> target the platform and is thus horribly and irreparably
> destructive.
Please define few. Would you like to tell all the people playing Quake or
Doom that Linux emulation is useless (or who are using their machines as
Quake servers)? Is it useless for people who want Acrobat Reader so they
can see PDF files? Is it useless for people who want to use an HTML
editor and choose asWedit? Is it useless for those who want to use Word
Perfect? Is it useless for those who want to use Star Office? Oracle?
Every person I've turned on to FreeBSD, and I mean EVERYONE, appreciates
the Linux emulation. The simple fact is that wo/ it they would be running
Linux. It's the one reason my advisor is likely to use FreeBSD - we need
Mathematica for our research. There is no FreeBSD version. There is
however a Linux version. He can either run the Linux version on FreeBSD
or run it under Linux. Which would you prefer?
> Has no one here learned from OS/2? Read my lips: emulating a more
> popular platform is suicide. What part of that sentence don't you
> understand?
You're looking very selectively at the OS/2 story. They stopped being a
viable desktop OS because they stopped emulating/couldn't emulate W95
apps. Yes, that's because M$ kept moving their standards. And OS/2 is
still a viable and widely-used business OS. I know for a fact that
nationwide State Farm uses it still in all of their regional offices. I
have a friend who stuck w/ OS/2 until he just couldn't run the apps he
wanted anymore because they needed W95. I then moved him to FreeBSD. He
would have certainly run Linux wo/ the emulation. Linux may be able to
move their ABI around but we'll still be able to emulate because it's open
source.
Face it - Linux is bigger. Companies will write their software for Linux
until FreeBSD has the numbers to support a native port.
> Not what I advocated. I noted that ports for 2.2.8-RELEASE were no
> longer being maintained less than two months after it shipped. What I
> advocated was that the ports tree support a release for at least 6
> months after it shipped. Otherwise, every release is automatically an
> "orphan."
We've been through this before and I didn't think it would be necessary to
go over this again, but ... The ports for 2.2.8 are there, on CD or at
Walnut Creek. Most of the current ports tree will still work under 2.2.8
(there are certainly exceptions). If people want newer versions, they are
stuck w/ the fact that the ports tree has moved on and they may need to
track the ports tree. They may also, if they are using an old release,
regardless of how "old" it is, may have to do some work to get it to work
right. No different than if a person using a Windows 3.1 app had to
upgrade and the next version available is W95/8.
> Take your choice of technical approaches.
Which are? You keep saying you have ideas but I've seen no clear layout
of your idea to do this. And you still have not answered me as to whether
you have done anything other than talk about this. Have you talked to
Mike Smith or Satoshi Asami? Have you even got a clear idea of what you
intend to do or how to do it?
> >Re: the FreeBSD emulator for Linux
> >You are the _only_ one I've heard support this. Not one person to my
> >recall has suggested this is a workable idea other than you.
> Bull. Terry Lambert has also supported this idea, and I've seen
> messages from one or two other folks that were at least somewhat
> supportive.
I said to my recall. I now recall Terry saying something but not what he
said.
> But, of course, the naysayers are more vocal, because it's easier to
> advocate doing nothing than to help change things for the better. And
> a lot of folks walk away if support for an idea isn't unanimous, or
> nearly so.
And even more people walk away when it appears to be just talk because
you've never backed up any of these ideas with anything concrete that I
know of.
> It is not even POSSIBLE unless an emulator exists.
Can you explain to me why a company would want to encumber the majority of
their user base with an additional piece of software, that the company
needs to maintain (or at least keep updated assuming we have some team
doing this)? How is this profitable for them? How does this help them in
any way?
> > Companies will say "sure there's this FreeBSD emulator for Linux, but
> > they have roughly 1/6th the number of installations _and_ can emulate
> > Linux.
> The latter is the bigger problem. Again, Linux emulation has been a
> huge blow to the platform. At some point, after Linux emulates FreeBSD
> and FreeBSD wins native ports, FreeBSD's emulation of Linux should be
> deprecated.
What? No the problem is this - simple supply and demand. Linux has the
user base and hence the demand. FreeBSD, better though I may think it is,
does not have the numbers. Software companies are killing 2 birds with
one stone. Is it hurting FreeBSD to have emulation? How? I, or you, can
run software that would NOT otherwise be possible wo/ the Linux emulation.
FreeBSD does _not_ have enough user base for most software companies to
want to write native code to. Until we gain that user base we're not even
a blip on their radar.
> >The problem Brett is that all of the things you have suggested/proposed
> >have _no_ backing from anyone but you (for whatever reasons),
> Bull. However, it's a well-known online phenomenon that once the
> flamers (such as yourself) get going, those in support of an idea tend
> to be dissuaded from voicing their support because they don't want to
> be flamed.
I've flamed you how? I've called you no names. I haven't screamed that
you're ranting. I said you seem to have ideas, but you haven't done any
work to try to get them implemented. I've asked you multiple times about
whether you have approached Satoshi about keeping the ports tree working
for 2.2.8. Have you even done that? That's not coding, it's not even
planning. You said you wanted permission to look into it? Have you asked
for it?
> >As it is I haven't even seen you attempt to fix or maintain one port.
> And I may never attempt it. You are very quickly convincing me that my
> efforts will be unwelcome or unappreciated.
What part of "there are 145 ports that need maintainers" sounds like that
help would be unappreciated? I have 2 ports that are broken right now
because the distfiles have gone belly up, but I haven't had time to fix
them. I could use help getting those fixed. Really all they need is a
distfile fix and (maybe) a new home for the distfiles. As it is they
won't likely get fixed until after I defend my Ph.D.
You don't need permission to submit a port upgrade. You just do it.
> >Since you've been posting regularly to -advocacy, the only thing I've seen
> >from you is grandiose ideas
> Not "grandiose" -- however, they do require a team of people to do.
> That's why I've posted messages asking for support.
"Grandiose" was probably a bad word. You've suggested a number of ideas.
I agree with your ports idea, at the very least. However all of these
take manpower as you note. In the ports case, the ports team is swamped
now. There are a couple of hundred ports PRs sitting in GNATs right now.
There is no way they could have a current ports tree working for 2.2.8.
Here's where a single person could help by finding ports that don't work
for 2.2.8 (check the PR's for reports of failures) and attempt to make
them work. It's simple, easy and would be appreciated.
In terms of the emulation thing, it's clear you have a very different idea
compared to almost everyone else about the worth of emulating Linux. Fine
- the code is there. Find people who want to help, maybe Terry, get help
from Linux users or a distribution and get started. Again, you don't need
approval from the core team, or me, or Jordan or Wes to do it. No one is
stopping you. I'd love to be proved wrong and see all the software coded
for FreeBSD directly.
> By not only refusing to support them but attempting to shoot them
> down, you are telling me -- on behalf of the Cabal of FreeBSD Insiders
> -- that there's no point in attempting to work on advocacy or even
> contributing code. Fine. Then I won't. You can have your status quo
> and your failing efforts at PR.
I certainly wouldn't consider myself a "FreeBSD Insider." I have no
commit privileges. Am I a supporter of FreeBSD? Sure - I helped create
Daemon News; I maintain 10 or so ports; I introduce friends,
acquaintances and colleagues to FreeBSD. I moved our dept. server to
FreeBSD from Linux and am teaching the sys admin to follow her way around
the machine. I've installed FreeBSD on my advisor's computer and
convinced him to put it on his workstation. I've installed FreeBSD on
a friend's computer. I answer questions that I know the answer to on
the mailing lists. That seems like pretty good PR to me, even if it isn't
on the front page of some newspaper.
> Brett, Jordan, Wes: you've just alienated a contributor who's already
> done a lot of advocacy and wanted to do more -- plus a bunch of coding
> besides. I hope you're proud.
I really like your articles Brett. Most of the time they appear sane and
clearheaded, but everytime I've seen you in a discussion, even when I'm
not involved, you turn into Mr. Hyde. If you don't want to contribute,
fine. No one's forcing you to. If you code something that'd be great.
I'm sure the core team would love to have the driver.
Brett Taylor
***********************************************************
Brett Taylor brett@peloton.physics.montana.edu *
brett@daemonnews.org *
*
http://www.daemonnews.org/ *
***********************************************************
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9903222309360.5750-100000>