On Wednesday, December 03, 2014 02:39:53 AM Mark David Dumlao wrote: > Why do I get the feeling that this is another episode of the "i hate > LennartSoft(tm) too" circlejerk on the gentoo mailing list?
Why do I get the feeling you just want another flamewar? I don't see any mention of systemd or anything else written by Lennart, apart from your comment. > this mailing list used to be about gentoo. It still is. > On Dec 3, 2014 1:38 AM, "James" <wirel...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > Rich Freeman <rich0 <at> gentoo.org> writes: > > > > is integration of the best of the CoreOS ideas into "Gentoo proper". > > > > > > I'm not suggesting that "/usr types of systems" are going away. I'm > > > just pointing out that they're not really the focus of CoreOS (hosting > > > them inside containers is, but not running these kinds of applications > > > in the host itself). > > > > I do not intend to follow the CoreOS commercial path. It intend to mod > > gentoo to achieve those attractive attributes back into my "gentoo > > proper". > > tftp, pxe, dhcp, uefi and many other tools give us a path to > > running the least (embedded) to the most (complex traditional server) > > as an extension (compliment) to the cluster. So as was pointed out, > > I'm merely "lifting" form CoreOS what they lifted from their predicessors; > > no more no less. I see the gentoo admins being able to move hardrware > > in and out of the cluster, dynamically and being able to run many > > sorts of gentoo systems (embedded to fulls server) on a myriad of > > hardware they own and control. > > > > > You seem to be wanting a minimalist profile of Gentoo, not CoreOS. > > > > YES!, I want Gentoo to "CRUSH" CoreOS because we can and our goal is not > > to deceptively move users to a "rent the binary" jail. OK? > > > > > < think many of us would love to see that, and I've been an advocate of > > > paring down <at> system for just this reason. I just wouldn't use the > > > term "CoreOS" with that as this is going to lead to confusion. CoreOS > > > is a specialized distro intended to host containers, no more, no less. > > > > OK, we see CoreOS differently. For me it was an Epiphany moment of > > where I'm been trying to end up, with the aforementioned Gentoo twists. > > > > > It isn't intended as a starting point for embedded projects or such. > > > Sure, maybe you could make it work, but sooner or later CoreOS will > > > make some change that will make you very unhappy because they aren't > > > making it for you. > > > > CoreOS will never be in my critical path. Large corporations will turn > > computer scientist and hackers into WalMart type-employees. Conglomerates > > are the enemy, imho. I fear Conglomerates much more than any group > > of government idiots. ymmv. > > > > (warning digression) > > > > Just look at the entire "net neutrality" > > > > turf struggle. That sort of "corner the market" monopolistic behavior > > would not be possible, if we had just maintained the "MAE" precedence > > for network peering. Obama had little choice; but, putting networks > > under SS7 style telecom regulations is a deceptive and horrible idea. > > Conglomerates lobby congress and get very bad ideas written into law. > > All we needed is regulation to allow (force) all networks to peer with > > other networks. The entire concept of "private peering" is horseshit > > and it should be ended immediately. CoreOS and the "Cloud" lobbyist can > > easily get regulations passed to put an end to this linux experiment, > > imho. > > Differnt subject I know, but the tactics of conglomerates are always the > > same. Roll up competition and eliminate it, oh all in the name of better > > security and portecting our 1st amendment rights and our conglomerates. > > (sorry of the digression). > > > > > But, again, I'm all for a more lightweight Gentoo profile that doesn't > > > bundle stuff like openssh, or even an init implementation (since we > > > have several to choose from now). > > > > Funny, ssh is one of a few things I would put into drastically reduce > > @system. ymmv, unless you are going to add something like netconsole.c > > back into the bundle. > > > > I do not see my vision of the cluster (CoreOS insprired) to be limiting > > to anyone at Gentoo. Not the embedded folks, not the mimalist, not > > any init-camp, not the devs, hackers, or wannabees. And certainly > > not the users. Is this a large undertaking? Certainly. Are the pieces > > mostly already in existence, just scattered about and transversing time? > > (methinks YES). > > > > > > It all depends on how your vision works. Being older, I see a return to > > massive diskless nodes being what CoreOS and the entire "Cloud Vendor" > > conglomerates want. Conversely, I see those cheap microP now accompanied > > by > > enormous amount of ram and SSD that is dirt cheap forming the building > > blocks for the Gentoo cluster paradigm shift. I see Gentoo "smashing" that > > "Cloud-vendor CoreOS" paradigm by provide what they offer and so much more > > (full /usr systems) out of the same core codebase. I see Gentoo keeping > > the > > rank and file computer scientists and hackers, gamefully employed. I see > > the CoreOS folks migrating computer scientists and hackers to the Walmart > > model of underemployment at a few conglomerates. > > > > Gentoo provides an excellent set of choices and a very bright future for > > me > > (cluster). Other can pick their own poison.... > > > > > > peace, > > && thanks > > > > James
