2011/6/15 Darko Hojnik <[email protected]>: > Please tell me what makes KfreeBSD for you interesting to use? What does > KfreeBSD to makes the World a little bit better? It's a philosophical > question. > > So for me it's not interesting to deploy it on a Desktop. Because > FreeBSD/KfreeBSD leaks on support with mainstream-consumer like hardware. > Accept it because it is like is. The Slogan of FreeBSD is the power to > serve... Thats the real focus of FreeBSD. On a server FreeBSD is in many > cases better then Linux. And Debian GNU KfreeBSD is the logical pragmatic > way to simplifying the Power of the FreeBSD-Kernel with an good > package-management. > As an example Netapp is for storage one of the well known backbones on the > cloud. Would it be not better for the world if Debian kFreeBSD would takes > this part? Both has got the same kernel. Typical Desktops and Workstations > of today begins to be outdated. And within ten years they will haves no > future anymore. And that would be great! Everything in the Cloud usable on > demand just in time! > But the clock ticks and ticks... > Debian and all another opensource-projects has to realize whats currently > happen. I think they haves a good chance to win this game. If it will be > lost then it will lost everything. Democracy and generally every Freedom not > on Software only, on every part of life would be controlled on some > company's. > > My self is using more then 10 years Debian. Some years ago I could every day > say that debian ships mass with class. But in some cases currently it's mass > only instead class... > I think it will be nice if this project would set more focus on quality. The > Debian-installer supports only a basic install on ZFS. They is no support to > install it on subvolumes. Also to handle compression, DEDUP and other > features of ZFS. So you have still to choose debootstrap for an install in a > datacenter.
Thanks for your input Darko. I understand your concern but one often needs to balance the benefit against the cost, and IMHO providing HEAD snapshots via kfreebsd-9 has significant benefit with a very small cost (updating the package takes very little effort). > If you are hacking on the FreeBSD kernel so also you hack for an better > KfreeBSD too. Don't take everything only, give something back. Debian is not > Ubuntu. When it comes to giving back, having a readily available staging area that tracks HEAD makes it easier for patches to be merged upstream. > I'm looking very interested on this project. But I see very much open > problems. Why merge unnecessary stuff they will need to much time to solve > currently not present problems? As for D-I, writing complete ZFS support would require significant manpower, which we don't have. Unless you want to help, of course. Which other open problems did you have in mind? -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
