On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:07 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >
> However I think OI and illumos have been fairly symbiotic -- indeed OI still > builds upon the illumos base, and at the moment OI is the "de-facto" > reference distribution of illumos. However, if OI is considering a different > base -- say SchilliX -- then that would probably represent a significant > rift. (I have some concerns about the topics of conversation on oi-dev of > late; decisions to for example change the shell or filesystem layout can have > broad ramifications. While a distro can choose to do as it wants, if there > is that much difference between the base and the distro, then it will be much > harder for the base developers to continue to use the distro as a reference.) The filesystem layout change discussion was initiated by me, because of a perceived inconsistency in the way Illumos stores binaries on disk. But Alan C has since cleared that up, and I no longer intend to pursue the idea. Instead I am now focusing my attention on pre-built (detached) zones, which would offer a true functional separation between groups of applications. As for the shell changes, I can't speak to the technical merit of that option as I haven't looked closely at that code or the problem(s) it claims to solve. I don't think anyone is going to rebase the OI distro on Schillix-ON just yet. If they did, that would create a significant rift not just between Illumos and OI but a rift within the OI community itself. > > - Garrett > >> >> But that's just my opinion. Others are certainly free to disagree. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> oi-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > oi-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev _______________________________________________ oi-dev mailing list [email protected] http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
