On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:45:13PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: > That is already done in Gentoo FreeBSD, or do you want me to do the > work for you to integrate OpenRC in the base system?
We want you to do the work to prove that it is an improvement. Otherwise it's "just another claim." You seem to be missing a couple of principles here, the most important of which is "first, do no harm." FreeBSD has as one of its underlying principles not to violate POLA (Principle Of Least Astonishment.) The corollary is that we don't replace code unless we're convinced (not just told) that the replacement is a better solution. If this makes FreeBSD more conservative than the way other OSes do things, so be it. I'm not trying to be harsh here. What I'm saying is that the burden of proof is on the person making the claims "it's better" to demonstrate that it's so. Otherwise, there are a zillion PRs with patches already in the database for committers to pick up and work on. > I already have OpenRC in Gentoo FreeBSD. Taking the time to integrate > OpenRC into FreeBSD would be an inefficient use of my time. Not only > would I fail to gain any improvements on my systems, but I would divert > development time from things that do benefit me. Then I expect the situation to remain unchanged. fwiw, from previous discussions on FreeBSD boot time, ISTR that there are other places where more time is spent. Some analysis to prove that indeed the rc subsystem is the dominant term would be a good starting place. mcl _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
