On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 13:56:22 PST Tom Keiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Feb 4, 2008 7:30 PM, Ken Gunderson > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [snip] > > > Linux => GPL license. Linux kernel bundled into > > assorted "distros" with > > > various GNU tools (Gnu's Not Unix, proclaimed loud > > and proud on their > > > homepage) and disparate userlands, etc., the > > components of which are > > > far from standardized. Dependency nightmares > > during installs and > > > upgrades. When several _hundred_ RH boxes are > > borked because of sloppy > > > merges, etc., who cares that it's commercially > > "supported", you still > > > have one hell of a lot of unhappy customers yelling > > at you. Granted, > > > Linux has improved over the years, but still not > > without it's warts. > > > > I fail to see what this has to do with anything that > > is being done > > with Project Indiana or OpenSOlaris in general. > > > > Regardless of the problems that these platforms have, > > right now, they > > are the ones leading the market. > > > > I'm dubious of the strategy implied by this remark. Trying to gain market > share by emulating a market leader is generally an exercise in futility. > People don't make large-scale platform migrations unless there is a > significant comparative advantage. Do you really think the GNU userland > provides Linux with such a comparative advantage? I sincerely doubt it -- > most people use bash due to inertia, not because it is inherently "better" > than ksh93. > > If you want compelling reasons to run Linux, look no further than a broad > range of device drivers and sane package management. Both of these are being > addressed without any dependency on moving towards a GNU userspace. I think > a large part of the argument for a GNU userland revolves around the false > premise that "approachability" and "ease of platform migration" are > synonymous. > > > > > Which brings us to Solaris. Can Solaris provide > > integrated, cohesive > > > kernel and true unix userland in a stable and well > > performing package > > > that is freely available, and hence able to compete > > on it's own > > > technical merits with the freely available *BSD's > > and Linuxes? I hope > > > > I find the phrase "true unix userland" to be rather > > funny. Solaris > > ships with several flavours of "userland" utilities, > > many of which > > aren't even in the default path configuration. > > > > Most of the utilities in the default path (such as > > grep, etc.) are > > widely panned for the lack of modern functionality, > > updates, and > > numerous bugs. > > > > While I personally I am very grateful for the xpg4, > > xpg6, and other > > standards compliant environments that are available; > > there is no > > reason that the default userland has to resemble the > > olden days of the > > pdp-11 :) (joking) > > > > If you consider the standards to be outdated, then the appropriate course of > action is to push for ratification of new revisions to the standards. > Adoption of the GNU toolchain simply perpetuates the widely-held belief that > standards-driven development is dead. That's hardly the sort of example a > project which purports to be best-of-breed should be setting. > > > > While I wish that there were better options than GNU > > userland in terms > > of functionality, the reality is that the majority of > > the open source > > world has chosen the GNU toolset, for better or > > worse, as their > > toolset of choice. > > > > I vehemently disagree with the notion that popularity should dictate product > engineering. Users are fickle. Popularity can be quite fleeting. Strategic > decisions should not be based on the current direction of the wind. There > are many cases where emancipation will take longer, but prove strategically > beneficial. > > > > Wasting precious resources on attempting to reinvent > > the GNU wheel, > > all in the name of (mostly) pride and arrogance, > > isn't going to win > > any battles. > > > > Pride and arrogance have absolutely nothing to do with the large-scale > opposition to adoption of the GNU userland. Unless by 'arrogance', you mean > the belief that software should be engineered instead of written in an ad-hoc > "organic" manner. I'm far more concerned by this (frankly inexplicable) > haste to get to the promised land of an approachable desktop-oriented Solaris > distribution, than I am about the actual implementation details. There is a > broad perception that the core design principles which have served to > differentiate Solaris from linux and its ilk seem to have largely been > forgotten. I cannot stress enough that this perception is largely fueled by > the fervor with which a few individuals promote change purely for the sake of > change. > > I have absolutely no problem with the project Indiana concept. To the > contrary, I'm quite happy that such an endeavour is being undertaken. > However, the strategy of supplanting vast amounts of code with the GNU > toolchain is a suboptimal path of least resistance. Emancipation is hard. > GNU user re-education is hard. So what? Hard in and of itself should never > serve as justification for not doing something. > > > > Ivory tower attitudes will keep that tower sparkling > > white, so that > > future generations may remember it fondly as they > > migrate to systems > > that actually meet their needs. > > > > Uh, nice straw man. I'm not aware of anyone who actually thinks the status > quo is acceptable. Rather, there is a contingent who don't fit within your > (false) dichotomy -- they believe the path towards a more approachable > product is best taken through thoughtful architectural review and > emancipation. Will this take time? Absolutely. Is it time well spent? I'd > argue that it is to our strategic advantage to take the time. If Indiana is > to value backwards compatibility even mildly as much as Solaris, then getting > things right the first time around will be absolutely crucial. > > > > > so. That's why I'm looking at it in the first > > place. As a professional > > > unix sysadmin I'm not too interested in yet another > > "Linux distro > > > of the month" to play with nights and weekends > > because I have no other > > > life. So what's the Solaris target market going to > > be, professionals or > > > hobbyists? There's lots more of the latter if > > you're objective is > > > mindshare with the pc hobbyist rags, etc., wh/may > > do quite well at > > > raising visibility. But I don't think these folks > > buy support > > > contracts, nor are they likely to upgrade to Sun > > "big iron" sparc > > > machines. > > > > I'm not interested in a yet another "Linux distro of > > the month" > > either; that's why I'm excited about things like: > > IPS, the > > Distribution Constructor, Caiman, and others. All of > > these projects > > are taking fairly different approaches to the same > > problems others > > have tried to solve before. IPS, notably, stands out > > the most as being > > widely divergent in its approach to packaging. > > > > I would encourage you to approach the efforts of this > > community with > > an open mind. > > > > Many of us are quite open to change. However, we're also not naive. Rapid > change is a perfect vehicle for poorly reasoned schemes to slip through the > cracks. Many of the things which will come out of Indiana will be extremely > beneficial to OpenSolaris. However, these developments should not serve to > absolve Indiana for any future misdeeds. > > > I do not believe for one moment that the engineers at Sun will replace > > anything in Solaris without careful consideration and planning. > > Nor do I. Sun stands too much to lose from the alienation of their old > users. I'm confident that cooler heads will prevail. > > -Tom Much wisdom spoken here by Tom, imho. Unfortunately, the manner in which some people's mua's dreadfully mangle replies makes it look like I said a lot of things which I didn't. Just thought I'd mention before any confusion arose... -- Best regards, Ken Gunderson Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
