On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 5:38 AM, Joerg Schilling < joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> David Halko <davidha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > If there was failure, it was with OpenSolaris programmers being too > > aggressive, and the rest of us inheriting the mess. > > I would call me an "OpenSolaris programmer", are you talkig about the > people > that have been employed by Sun? > I suspect you were not "too aggressive". :-) > > Core OS functionality (booting, services, packaging, etc.) should not be > > dependent upon newer GNU userland, but based upon thoroughly debugged > > Solaris userland. These binaries should be separate and distinct > > locations (perhaps: /bin, /sbin, etc.) for simple maintenance and to > enable > > easy embedding into smaller form-factors. > Agreed for the userland! > > What do you mean by "distinct locations" in this relation? > If something is for the core-os functionality (i.e. rebooting, password management, etc.) - then these binaries should be in /bin (regular user commands) or /sbin (possibly for system adminstrative commands?) If users want a different userland, it could be made available in /usr. Upstream packages should not be mixed into the core. > > If people wish to have a newer userland, where bugs are constantly being > > thrashed out, from other developers in other spheres (not interested in > > Solaris longevity) - then those should be put elsewhere and people should > > have the option to pick & choose (perhaps: /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, > > /usr/gnu/bin, /usr/fbsd, etc.) and those communities inherit the bugs > those > > userlands suffer from. The core should be wary of suffering from external > > bugs that others may not approve fixes for or suffering from feature > > suppression where others may block innovation regarding. > > We, the Solaris community need to find people who are interested and able > to > work on the UNIX userland. I am doing this since a while, but Sun > disregarded > the userland (another mistake from Sun...). > > If you look at the software I maintain and distrinbute, you will see that > there > is a lot of enhanced UNIX software inside already. What we need to take > care of > is to keep the UNIX philosophy in mind and not to be a blind Linux > follower. > > > Sun and Oracle, in OpenSolaris and Solaris 11, merged the standards-base > > and gnu-base userlands together without strict differentiation, > > contaminating the core OS services, which was perhaps the poorest > > engineering decision I have ever seen. I would hope others do not make > the > > same mistake. > > Schillix does not make that mistake ;-) > > > The purpose of an OS is to run software - if existing commercial software > > will not run under the OpenSolaris splinter, there may be little reason > for > > the splinter to exist, with the exception of some special purpose > > appliance. The usefulness of a special-purpose appliance running with an > > OpenSolaris kernel without USB3, WiFi, or clustered-ZFS support is > puzzling > > to me... unless it is embedded - and then modernized userland becomes > less > > important. > > We need to work on USB3 of course and we need to work on Wifi (e.g. to > implement support for "eduroam"). > > > Clearly, Illumos is driving OpenSolaris source code towards storage > > appliance and cloud-based hypervisor. Few in those groups understand the > > necessity of clustered ZFS for storage to provide good any-to-any H-A or > > D-R... this tells me those projects may not be long-for-this-world. > > Illumos completely ignores general software quality. I cannot speak for > their > ZFS enhancements (as I did not look at them) but for the rest most of the > changes are not acceptable by me. > My intention is not to fault individuals or projects. It is just to observe the major contributors and where their "bread and butter" is. With Red Hat bundling clustering with their hypervisor and IBM bundling clustering on ZFS with Linux in the HPC market - my concern is with the competitiveness of Illumos in their perspective arenas. I think the window for them is closing, quickly, which is a great concern to me - it will not take long for others to take off-the-shelf Linux and over-deliver what they can do, with no programming expertise, at all. > > I guess the rest of us need to decide what WE WANT out of an OpenSolaris > > splinter. > > We need a general purpose OpenSolaris continuation that is not dominated by > companies. > I think we need to find a niche and operate well, in it. For me, that is SVR4. Draw in those developers to grow community with a standards-base and provide enhanced [Solaris] functionality. Dave http://svr4.blogspot.com/ > Jörg > > -- > EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 > Berlin > j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) > joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: > http://schily.blogspot.com/ > URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily >
_______________________________________________ belenix-dev mailing list belenix-dev@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/belenix-dev
