Sorry bout the typo, AndreAS :( Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, John Galt wrote:
> >I think I've said this before, but it isn't archived, so I get to say it >again :) There is nothing stopping us from going with packages for all >kernels once we get going. The big thing is to get one ready for prime >time first, then go for the rest. Andreas has pointed us in the direction >of OpenBSD with his _fait accompli_. My suggestion is to hold off >starting anything that conflicts with Andrei's efforts until you're sure >that you won't be taking anything away from the main thrust: getting a BSD >kernel packaged and ready for inclusion in the main project. > >On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Mark Berry wrote: > >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Andreas Schuldei [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:17 AM >>> To: Mark Berry >>> Subject: Re: assimilating OpenBSD >>> >>> >>> * Mark Berry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010207 11:01]: >>> > So basically what you are doing (if you don't mind me probing >>> .. I wan't be >>> > clearly on the same page if we are to work together on this >>> project).. is >>> > installing a 'base' version of OpenBSD and moving in the pkg mgr and and >>> > debian tools on top of it. >>> >>> yes. plus you will need gmake from the ports. For personal >>> convenience I also installed bash and vim, but that is not >>> important. >>> >>> > Which version of OpenBSD are you working with? >>> >>> I took the current snapshot from the ftp servers. And this >>> morning I checked out the CVS and recompiled tar, it was broken. >>> >>> > Is it going to be a full fork or run on top of future versions of BSD. >>> >>> I wnat to take advantage of the continuing code review of >>> OpenBSD. I want to be able to keep on top of that an later have >>> some kind of autobuilder running, which will happily compile >>> away. >>> >> >>Can I ask a fundamental question.. I prefer to use FreeBSD as a server, >>userland.. etc. I know that OpenBSD is a great box in terms of security >>(the Best?) ... but... if I was ultimately concerned enough to sacrafice >>all the user-side benifits of FreeBSD/Linux based distro.. wouldn't I want >>to use a 'secure' version of OpenBSD? I can't imagine that too many people >>use OpenBSD for the great driving experience. The installation, etc is a >>bit more dificult. >> >>Now on the same note... BSD has a great packaging and porting system, >>arguably as good if not better than debians. I like the idea of using >>debians packaging system to try cleanly organize and merge the porting of >>code effort between the two systems. >> >>I guess I must say that my main interest is having a distribution that would >>be Linux-Like with a BSD core. (Is that silly?) It's all about >>consistancy. >> >>Now I am not going to abandon the idea if we all agree to move forward with >>OpenBSD. ... but I think that it must be understood that the benifits of >>secure and audited code will very quickly go away as we start to debianize >>the distro. >> >>If those benifts are gone should we look at using FreeBSD? >> >>Should we look at even a more heavily striped down version such as the >>Darwin kernel? (Though I don't know what we will do for drivers, etc.. >>probably not a good idea). >> >>I will take your milestone list and goals and maybe make some modifications >>to it if you don't mind with some of my proposals and see if we logically >>decide what BSD we wish to use based on what our needs our out of the >>system. I think that we have to do it in a way that will keep the DebianBSD >>in line with the movement of the BSD system we are following. Maybe the end >>result is a agnostic BSD based package managment system. >> >>Anyway, all these are points of discussion but I would like to see these >>decisions made sooner rather than later as I am anxious to use apt-get with >>my BSD based system with my linux like environment. (Ok, thats my idea of >>how it would be.. open for comments!) :) >> >> >> >> >> >>> > (It's not going to just be a package port to OpenBSD and support future >>> > versions of OpenBSD..) Or is it? >>> >>> That can happen as a addition later, if people want to use >>> gphoto or Kdevelope on their Debian OpenBSD machine and this is >>> not in OpenBSD yet. Did I understand the question correctly? >>> >>> > All of the gnu tools will port over quite easily.. (tar, etc etc). >>> >>> If we find no other way to get the packages build , we might >>> install them, but I would try to get along with the OpenBSD >>> tools, first. But I allready consider to use the gnutools for the >>> packaging. I can hardly imagine how that should endanger any box >>> but the build system. >>> >>> > The >>> > Ports effort of BSD is great in that they do help maintain the subtle >>> > differences in the OS and should be the base of the package >>> building effort. >>> > Probably wouldn't take too long to setup a 'base' server type >>> distribution >>> > with all the base gnu tools as well as things such as apache, sendmail, >>> > zope, mysql, postgresql, gnu tools and make them accessable >>> through apt-get. >>> >>> I guess so too. That would be a good alternative for step 7. I >>> agree. >>> >>> > My company does run an ASP business and we have an emence amount of >>> > bandwidth for hosting an ftp server for the packages and >>> distribution and >>> > would be happy to help there as well. >>> >>> It would be cool to have an OpenBSD box to fiddel around on and >>> have accounts for several people to work on the job8 perhaps. >>> >> >>On this note, I have a SGI 1200 w/Dual CPU 700 PIII w/512MB ram and dual >>SCSI 9GIG I could probably donate to this cause. I will set it up with the >>BSD distro we all agree to use and haul it down to London (Our datacenter is >>in the AboveNet London fascility). >> >>We will need to setup a list of the people who will be involved with this >>project and create accounts for key developers/members. (For obvious >>reasons I don't want to have a hundred people running around chewing up my >>bandwidth un-necesarily).. but we can do what we can. It will give a >>reasonable box for testing and development. >> >> >>> I use an old i486 here, which is slow but works. The Debian >>> Network is also availabe for Package hosting. Since there is >>> encryption in the source it should be outside the US. Where are >>> you? >>> I use pandora.debian.org right now. >> >> >>-- >>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > -- Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity. Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
