In message <201003080329.o283tqic011...@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>, Garrett Wollma
n writes:
>If we were talking about 100 architectures, I might feel differently,
>but in this universe, we have, what? eight? And there are how many
>architectures currently in mass production? This whole discussion
In article <20100307.144736.420173476735197890@bsdimp.com>, Warner
Losh writes:
>We don't have quite as many problems as the NetBSD/OpenBSD crowd in
>this respect. They tend to define a new MACHIINE more often then we
>have (or will). The need for sys/arch is less severe here than there
>be
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 4:49 PM, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <20100308000203.ga70...@dragon.nuxi.org>
> "David O'Brien" writes:
> : On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 02:49:04PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> : > In message: <20100307054423.ge70...@dragon.nuxi.org>
> : > "David
In message: <20100308000203.ga70...@dragon.nuxi.org>
"David O'Brien" writes:
: On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 02:49:04PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > In message: <20100307054423.ge70...@dragon.nuxi.org>
: > "David O'Brien" writes:
: > : On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 09:41:40AM +000
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 08:51:22PM +, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, David O'Brien wrote:
>> No, not it isn't. Provide a script to convert path's in the diff. This is
>> what $LARGE_FREEBSD_USER did when it rearranged it source tree.
>>
>> It was done by creating a copy of the CV
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 02:49:04PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <20100307054423.ge70...@dragon.nuxi.org>
> "David O'Brien" writes:
> : On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 09:41:40AM +, Robert Watson wrote:
> : > On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> : >> In message ,
>
In message: <20100307054423.ge70...@dragon.nuxi.org>
"David O'Brien" writes:
: On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 09:41:40AM +, Robert Watson wrote:
: > On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
: >> In message , Robert
: >> Watso n writes:
: >>> Doing that kind of rearrangement [...] wou
In message: <20100307052949.gb70...@dragon.nuxi.org>
"David O'Brien" writes:
: On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 01:28:24AM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote:
: > FWIW, NetBSD's charter has been to run their OS on a number of
: > architectures, not just a primary set of architectures; OpenBSD's
:
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, David O'Brien wrote:
No, not it isn't. Provide a script to convert path's in the diff. This is
what $LARGE_FREEBSD_USER did when it rearranged it source tree.
It was done by creating a copy of the CVS repo and moved files around. Old
releases stayed in the old repo, and
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 09:41:40AM +, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> In message , Robert
>> Watso n writes:
>>> Doing that kind of rearrangement [...] would be a nightmare for anyone
>>> with large [...] patches, so I'd say we could pretty much rule tha
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 12:01:30PM +0100, Svein Skogen (Listmail Account) wrote:
> Oh, so because a lot of the programmers behind it receive wages, and the
> project itself won't commit ritual suicide by basically blocking the
> companies using FreeBSD from returning improvements they make to the
>
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 01:28:24AM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> FWIW, NetBSD's charter has been to run their OS on a number of
> architectures, not just a primary set of architectures; OpenBSD's
> charter differs -- if we all were NetBSD or OpenBSD, then we'd all be
> using the same thing. B
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 11:16:41AM +, Doug Rabson wrote:
> I think you misunderstand. Some of us old-timers have been having this
> discussion repeatedly for well over ten years. It always ends up the same
> way - a re-org might make the source tree marginally prettier but the
> consequences fo
Alex Keda writes:
> Let's wait another 10 years, and, coming at last to understand
> that this must be done, and do it was 20 times harder.
First, all architectures are not equal in FreeBSD's eyes. Look
for "Tier 1 architectures" in the docs and mailing lists.
Second, if you w
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:33 AM, paradox wrote:
> so, I really do not understand why it is so difficult to move a few folders
> in the shared folder is a big problem
> as is done in openbsd and netbsd
> http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/arch/?only_with_tag=MAIN
> http://www.openbsd.org/
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Mark Linimon wrote:
> There are two chief problems with a large-scale reorg of our src tree:
>
> - There are many companies who use FreeBSD as part of their business.
> In the case of ISPs or companies who use FreeBSD as a base of their
> products, this would
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message , Doug Rabson writ
es:
I think you misunderstand. Some of us old-timers have been having this
discussion repeatedly for well over ten years.
s/ten/fifteen/ :-)
s/fifteen/twenty five/ if you include BSD 4.2
___
On 03/05/10 11:10, Alex Keda wrote:
I'm not going anywhere, not even hope for it =)
I'm trying to make FreeBSD a better, more logical.
Maybe that's not very successful, but judging by the number of
responses, it hurt many, and made to think even more people.
One of the things which attracted m
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Alex Keda wrote:
thus, it is not 'Free', this managed by 'consumers like Isilon, NetApp,
Juniper, and many others'?
It might be helpful to think of them as 'customers' who are using our
'product' and paying for it by feeding back patches and employing FreeBSD
developers.
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message , Robert
Watso n writes:
[...] it's that changes in layout come with a less visible but much larger
cost than "svn mv".
Really stupid question: Doesn't svn support symlinks ?
Yes, but does that help? The issue is not user applicati
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Alex Keda wrote:
On 05.03.2010 12:17, Robert Watson wrote:
consumers like Isilon, NetApp, Juniper, and many others
thus, it is not 'Free', this managed by 'consumers like Isilon, NetApp,
Juniper, and many others'?
These and other companies contribute significantly to the
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 02:27:06PM +0300, Alex Keda wrote:
> On 05.03.2010 14:16, Doug Rabson wrote:
> >On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:10:43 +0300, Alex Keda wrote:
> >
> >>On 05.03.2010 13:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >>
> >>>In message<4b90e171.2040...@lissyara.su>, Alex Keda writes:
> >>>
> >
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 12:01:30 +0100 "Svein Skogen (Listmail Account)"
wrote:
> On 05.03.2010 11:48, Alex Keda wrote:
> > On 05.03.2010 12:59, Doug Rabson wrote:
> >> On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:56, Alex Keda wrote:
> >>> It seems to me, business and freedom - are mutually exclusive
> >>> things. or you
"Poul-Henning Kamp" writes:
> Really stupid question: Doesn't svn support symlinks ?
It does, but the moment we move in that direction, someone will start
complaining that they can't check out the source on Windows (which is
the reason why we no longer have any files in the tree with colons in
t
paradox writes:
> so, I really do not understand why it is so difficult [...]
Easy for you to say, since you're not the one who would have to do the
work and spend the next two years cleaning up the resulting mess.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
On 05.03.2010 14:16, Doug Rabson wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:10:43 +0300, Alex Keda wrote:
On 05.03.2010 13:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message<4b90e171.2040...@lissyara.su>, Alex Keda writes:
then can a more correct name of the project or ClosedBSD or
Man
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:27:06 +0300, Alex Keda wrote:
> On 05.03.2010 14:16, Doug Rabson wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:10:43 +0300, Alex Keda
wrote:
>>
>>> On 05.03.2010 13:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>>
In message<4b90e171.2040...@lissyara.su>, Alex Keda writes:
>>>
In message , Doug Rabson writ
es:
>I think you misunderstand. Some of us old-timers have been having this
>discussion repeatedly for well over ten years.
s/ten/fifteen/ :-)
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer
On 05.03.2010 14:16, Doug Rabson wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:10:43 +0300, Alex Keda wrote:
On 05.03.2010 13:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message<4b90e171.2040...@lissyara.su>, Alex Keda writes:
then can a more correct name of the project or ClosedBSD or
Man
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:10:43 +0300, Alex Keda wrote:
> On 05.03.2010 13:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> In message<4b90e171.2040...@lissyara.su>, Alex Keda writes:
>>
>>
>>> then can a more correct name of the project or ClosedBSD or
ManagedBSD?
>>> =)
>>> or something abstract?
>>>
>>
On 05.03.2010 13:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message<4b90e171.2040...@lissyara.su>, Alex Keda writes:
then can a more correct name of the project or ClosedBSD or ManagedBSD? =)
or something abstract?
You are free to use any other operating system of your choice, if you
are not ha
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 13:48:17 +0300, Alex Keda wrote:
> On 05.03.2010 12:59, Doug Rabson wrote:
>> On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:56, Alex Keda wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 05.03.2010 12:45, Doug Rabson wrote:
>>>
On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:30, Alex Keda wrote:
> On 05.03.2010 12:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05.03.2010 11:48, Alex Keda wrote:
> On 05.03.2010 12:59, Doug Rabson wrote:
>> On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:56, Alex Keda wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 05.03.2010 12:45, Doug Rabson wrote:
>>>
On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:30, Alex Keda wrote:
In message <4b90e171.2040...@lissyara.su>, Alex Keda writes:
>then can a more correct name of the project or ClosedBSD or ManagedBSD? =)
>or something abstract?
You are free to use any other operating system of your choice, if you
are not happy with FreeBSD.
Don't let the door hit you on the way
On 05.03.2010 12:59, Doug Rabson wrote:
On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:56, Alex Keda wrote:
On 05.03.2010 12:45, Doug Rabson wrote:
On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:30, Alex Keda wrote:
On 05.03.2010 12:17, Robert Watson wrote:
consumers like Isilon, NetApp, Juniper, and many others
On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:56, Alex Keda wrote:
> thus, it is not 'Free', this managed by 'consumers like Isilon, NetApp,
> Juniper, and many others'?
It isn't managed by them whatsoever.
FreeBSD is a cooperative anarchy, driven by working code and rough consensus.
That's what controls the checkins.
H
On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:56, Alex Keda wrote:
> On 05.03.2010 12:45, Doug Rabson wrote:
>> On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:30, Alex Keda wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 05.03.2010 12:17, Robert Watson wrote:
>>>
consumers like Isilon, NetApp, Juniper, and many others
>>> thus, it is not 'Free', th
On 05.03.2010 12:45, Doug Rabson wrote:
On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:30, Alex Keda wrote:
On 05.03.2010 12:17, Robert Watson wrote:
consumers like Isilon, NetApp, Juniper, and many others
thus, it is not 'Free', this managed by 'consumers like Isilon, NetApp,
Juniper, and many othe
In message , Doug Rabson write
s:
>Normal business practice doesn't include
>intentionally making your customers' lives difficult - if you make a
>habit of it they tend to go elsewhere.
Right, but as Sun has so definitively shown, you don't do your
customers any service either, by being mortally
On 5 Mar 2010, at 09:30, Alex Keda wrote:
> On 05.03.2010 12:17, Robert Watson wrote:
>> consumers like Isilon, NetApp, Juniper, and many others
> thus, it is not 'Free', this managed by 'consumers like Isilon, NetApp,
> Juniper, and many others'?
It might be helpful to think of them as 'custom
In message , Robert Watso
n writes:
>[...] it's that changes in layout
>come with a less visible but much larger cost than "svn mv".
Really stupid question: Doesn't svn support symlinks ?
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
F
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message , Robert
Watso n writes:
Doing that kind of rearrangement [...] would be a nightmare for anyone with
large [...] patches, so I'd say we could pretty much rule that out
outright.
I would say that we should do it occasionally, to encou
On 05.03.2010 12:17, Robert Watson wrote:
consumers like Isilon, NetApp, Juniper, and many others
thus, it is not 'Free', this managed by 'consumers like Isilon, NetApp,
Juniper, and many others'?
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://li
In message , Robert Watso
n writes:
>Doing that kind of rearrangement [...] would be a nightmare for
>anyone with large [...] patches, so I'd say we could pretty much rule
>that out outright.
I would say that we should do it occasionally, to encourage these
FreeBSD users to contribute as many
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, paradox wrote:
so, I really do not understand why it is so difficult to move a few folders
in the shared folder is a big problem as is done in openbsd and netbsd
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/arch/?only_with_tag=MAIN
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Xin LI wrote:
One good thing (in my opinion) that NetBSD and Darwin have is that they have
a "common" tree which holds the common files that shared between kernel and
userland libc. Currently we have 2 or more copies of certain files in the
tree but I'm not sure if it's a
> * paradox
> wrote:
> > Well, maybe my thoughts will be understood, then when
> the folder
> > /usr/src/sys/ number of architectures to increase to ~
> 50, [...]
>
> s/when/if/. ;-)
more than ~ 5 years, it was necessary that would create
/usr/src/sys/x86/ (http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/
Hi,
* paradox wrote:
> Well, maybe my thoughts will be understood, then when the folder
> /usr/src/sys/ number of architectures to increase to ~ 50, [...]
s/when/if/. ;-)
I know this sounds lazy, but shouldn't we start discussing this problem
by the time we support more than 10 architectures?
so, I really do not understand why it is so difficult to move a few folders in
the shared folder is a big problem
as is done in openbsd and netbsd
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/arch/?only_with_tag=MAIN
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/arch/
as you can see
Well, may
There are two chief problems with a large-scale reorg of our src tree:
- There are many companies who use FreeBSD as part of their business.
In the case of ISPs or companies who use FreeBSD as a base of their
products, this would make it much harder for them to synchronize
their local ch
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:20 AM, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <401095.35021...@web59107.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
> paradox writes:
> : iam propose all the architecture move in a separate directory
> : as is done in openbsd and netbsd
> :
> : ie
> : #mkdir /usr/src/sys/arch
> : #mv -R
In message: <401095.35021...@web59107.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
paradox writes:
: iam propose all the architecture move in a separate directory
: as is done in openbsd and netbsd
:
: ie
: #mkdir /usr/src/sys/arch
: #mv -R
/usr/src/sys/{amd64,arm,i386,ia64,mips,pc98,powerpc,sparc64,sun4v,x
> Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:48:19 +0100
> From: Dimitry Andric
> Sender: owner-freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org
>
> On 2010-03-04 14:51, paradox wrote:
> > #mkdir /usr/src/sys/arch
> > #mv -R
> > /usr/src/sys/{amd64,arm,i386,ia64,mips,pc98,powerpc,sparc64,sun4v,xen,x86)
> > /usr/src/sys/arch/
> >
>
On 2010-03-04 14:51, paradox wrote:
#mkdir /usr/src/sys/arch
#mv -R
/usr/src/sys/{amd64,arm,i386,ia64,mips,pc98,powerpc,sparc64,sun4v,xen,x86)
/usr/src/sys/arch/
Would it ever done in freebsd?
Sure, right after the switch to git.
___
freebsd-curren
iam propose all the architecture move in a separate directory
as is done in openbsd and netbsd
ie
#mkdir /usr/src/sys/arch
#mv -R
/usr/src/sys/{amd64,arm,i386,ia64,mips,pc98,powerpc,sparc64,sun4v,xen,x86)
/usr/src/sys/arch/
Would it ever done in freebsd?
__
55 matches
Mail list logo
