On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 10:04 AM Udo Grabowski (IMK) <udo.grabow...@kit.edu> wrote:
> > > On 26/07/2021 16:31, mayur...@kathe.in wrote: > > On Monday, July 26, 2021 07:36 PM IST, "Udo Grabowski (IMK)" < > udo.grabow...@kit.edu> wrote: > >> On 26/07/2021 14:51, mayur...@kathe.in wrote: > >>> On Monday, July 26, 2021 05:34 PM IST, "Udo Grabowski (IMK)" < > udo.grabow...@kit.edu> wrote: > >>>> On 26/07/2021 13:35, mayur...@kathe.in wrote: > >>>>> cross-posting since i accidentally addressed this one to > omnios-discuss the first time. sorry. > >>>>> > >>>>> i have noticed a trend amongst communities oriented towards building > open source unix-like operating systems; the project starts off as being > quite lean, but then acquires a lot of fat due to dependence on the > non-core toolkit. > >>>>> > >>>>> from the illumos perspective, i would say, "core" would be the > kernel + userland, all written using a combination of ansi-c and the system > default shell (korn). > >>>>> > >>>>> afaik, 'ips' is built using python which supposedly coordinates > between minisat (written in ansi-c), the userland and some mechanism to get > files off the network. > >>>>> i am not yet clear about how 'ips' works, and i am working at > overcoming that by consulting "till wegmueller" who has written a couple of > implementations of 'ips' using different programming languages (it think; > go and rust), but, it would be worthwhile to get a broader input from those > in the community who were from "sun microsystems" as to why python was > chosen over ksh93. > >>>>> > >>>>> also, after an email thread on omnios-disucss, it has been revealed > that there are a bunch of tools on the base system which depend of 'gnu' > bash, is there any way that could be rectified? or is that issue only > within omnios and not addressable by the illumos community at large? > >>>>> > >>>>> is there any way the illumos community could get interested in > shedding it's fat even at the userland level? > >>>> > >>>> Even if many here agree that, e.g., bash (or gnu tools in general) is > >>>> nothing we really want here, you cannot ignore its dominance > elsewhere, > >>>> especially in the Linux domain where most of the software we like to > >>>> provide also is targeted at nowadays. So if you want to have the > ability > >>>> to ever compile anything coming from upstream, or even enable your > users > >>>> to compile other software they download for themselves, you have to > >>>> provide all that "fat" if you don't want to constantly rewrite what > >>>> you've pulled. Whining to upstream about that will do nothing, you > will > >>>> be simply ignored... That's the reality today, you have to cope with > >>>> that. > >>>> > >>>> The same applies (even more) for python. And ksh93 has been obsoleted > >>>> in Linux, so guess what happens next in the foreseeable future... > >>>> > >>>> If you don't want to be left completely isolated quickly, you have to > >>>> adapt. > >>> > >>> udo, your logic is flawed. > >>> if you think that just because ksh93 being obsoleted under linux > should be reason enough to move to some other tool like python, then going > by that rationale, we should all be moving our bases over from illumos to > linux, yeah right, if you don't want to be left completely isolated > quickly, you have to adapt! > >> > >> That is exactly what I'm expecting and planning for our group ... > >> they've demanded it for years now. > > > > that would be great going for the illumos community. > > shedding fat as well as those people who aren't genuinely interested in > a positive future for illumos would go a long way for the overall health of > the project. > > hope you would be a good person and not bad mouth the project and > community after you've left. > > Personal attacks (even sneakily hidden) are not very welcome on > this list. But I clearly must admit that I was 100% expecting EXACTLY > this reaction...guess why. > > I'm not working for me, but for a group of scientists > that have to do work (and even myself have to do scientific > work and have no formal position for ANY system administration!), > I'm only jumped in because I know a lot of this stuff, and I'm only > here in this community because Opensolaris and illumos did exactly > serve our needs, but nobody else here knows about administration of > this OS, and nobody gives us money for someone that knows, but "Everyone > knows how to install Linux!", so we have to bite into the poisened > apple just because it's the only way to survive... It's NOT MY CHOICE ! > Not everyone using illumos or one of the distros is an illumos developer > just here for developing illumos... Indeed, most of them are just using > illumos and are in a similar situation, or had to migrate to Linux > already. If you are dependent on proprietary software, the options to > run anything non-Windows/Linux/Mac are practically zero today. Even > if you put a sack full of money on their desk, they won't compile you > an illumos version ... and guess the alternative in our case: Python.... > Not in the same situation (I run OI as part of my OS hobby), but I agree. And anything that makes Illumos even more different from Linux & Mac - even for technically sound reasons - only worsens the problem for Illumos. That said, OI has outlasted my most recent FreeBSD installation on this end, which is something I'd never have bet on happening, so clearly the developers are doing something right with the *status quo* IMO. > ------------------------------------------ illumos: illumos-discuss Permalink: https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/T8b661f3611aef44c-Maf46a66dd9930bb3a890475e Delivery options: https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription
