Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:13:29AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > Cf. Jesux. > > ...which has gone for some years without attracting anyone who is both > pious enough and clueful enough to develop it. > > I find this inverse correlation suggestive. :) Or, it could be that Jesux wasn't really meant seriously. Go to the Jesux home page and click on the word Jesux in the section title "What is Jesux?". You'll see a real explanation. Given that, it's damn cool. :-) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Glibc-based Debian GNU/KNetBSD
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 08:54:01AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: > > In any case, I hope I did indicate that I have less experience than many > > list posters with threads (although I hope to gain at least a bit more > > when I take an operating systems course at my uni as soon as next fall). > > If anything I said in the previous paragraph is rubbish, I'm quite > > willing to believe it. > > For those without the benefit of a University course, I would suggest picking > up one of the oldest classical texts on OS design principles and practice, > though I suggest reading it with a critical eye: > > Operating Systems Design and Implementation, Second Edition > Tannebaum, A. S. & Woodhull, A. S. > (Prentice Hall, 1997) According to the course syllabus for this year's edition of the course, there is a "draft of the course textbook" available online, and they recommend but don't require another book by Tanenbaum (whose name they spell with no doubled N), which is _Modern Operating Systems_, Second Edition, by Andrew S. Tanenbaum, Prentice Hall, 2001. Some or all of the course textbook (written by the professor, no less) is online, but I'm not going to post a link on this mailing list because I don't know if the professor wants it to be generally available to the world at large. (If he doesn't want that, then he especially wouldn't want a link that's permanently and publically archived on many sites and quite findable via Google.) It's supposed to be a really intense course, wherein you write threads implementations, a simple VFS, a simple filesystem to work with the VFS, etc., and it's amazingly intense if you take the additional "half-credit" lab section where you write a large portion of a simplified *NIX-like OS called Weenix. ;-) Here's to hoping I have my study skills refined by then - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Glibc-based Debian GNU/KNetBSD
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 04:41:39PM +0200, Momchil Velikov wrote: > Jimmy> I believe the poster was > Jimmy> offering it to Robert as a way to test his eventual port of a threads > Jimmy> library to glibc-on-BSD to see if it performs well and is thread-safe > Jimmy> for thread-intensive applications such as his. (To give you an idea of > Jimmy> this poster's standards, he stated that he considered all versions of > Jimmy> Linux prior to the existence of NPTL not to be thread-safe for his > Jimmy> purposes.) > > What's the point in demonstrating how fast can you do nothing ? Well, first of all, there probably are legitimate uses for it that neither of us has thought of, although I am willing to be told otherwise by someone who has looked into this. In that sense, it's probably not "nothing" to achieve fast and correct performance from the thread library in this regard. Yes, it has usefulness as an informal benchmark, or as part of a more rigorous formal benchmark. In any case, I hope I did indicate that I have less experience than many list posters with threads (although I hope to gain at least a bit more when I take an operating systems course at my uni as soon as next fall). If anything I said in the previous paragraph is rubbish, I'm quite willing to believe it. My point to Robert was primarily that most of the people making claims about threads were quite knowledgeable people, and if he was disagreeing with their easily-reached consensus, and voicing this disagreement on this list as forcefully as he was, he should have some concrete evidence (or else really good logic from premises that are agreed upon by everyone concerned) to back up his claims. If he doesn't do that, flamewars and hurt feelings ensue. Since I am not a threads expert, I personally tried not to make any claims about threads in my post to Robert beyond citing the statements of other posters who have demonstrated relevant knowledge or experience. - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Glibc-based Debian GNU/KNetBSD
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 02:40:05PM +0200, Momchil Velikov wrote: > >>>>> "Jimmy" == Jimmy Kaplowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Jimmy> I can't find the exact messages for some of these examples of their > Jimmy> experience, but one post mentioned that the poster had implemented > Jimmy> applications using hundreds or thousands of threads; > > How can this be considered anything else than an evidence of mental > illness ? (I purposedly avoid attributing it to malice). > > Or was this simply a pointless "benchmark" ? What I meant by mentioning it was that this poster actually seemed to have a legitimately useful (to him) application that legitimately needed lots of threads, and getting it to work well on his development or test system must have required a fair amount of familiarity with threads and/or his OS's implementation of threads. I believe the poster was offering it to Robert as a way to test his eventual port of a threads library to glibc-on-BSD to see if it performs well and is thread-safe for thread-intensive applications such as his. (To give you an idea of this poster's standards, he stated that he considered all versions of Linux prior to the existence of NPTL not to be thread-safe for his purposes.) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Glibc-based Debian GNU/KNetBSD
l, and Matthew did seem to remain mostly polite while being annoyed Rather than not paying attention to him, as you implied you would prefer to do, you might want to see if you can glean from his words any useful advice on how not to offend readers of this list. If I have reopened a (temporarily-)closed flamewar by posting this message, I do apologize for it, but hope that some of my arguments are stated clearly enough to reduce the heat of future flamewars on this topic. (Wishful thinking, I know) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian GNU/*BSD and web.
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:40:46PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote: > Hi, > > I'm editing/creating wml files to Debian GNU/*BSD project.But i need > more information about each project. > > - From Debian GNU/FreeBSD: > Only the news at the moment. There are available packages and such even for this port. I am currently running a machine exclusively on Debian GNU/FreeBSD. (i.e., not a chroot) I even have Apache running! :-) All the credit goes to Nathan Hawkins for getting it working; I'm just doing testing/bugreporting, occasional minor hacks, and soon a buildd. > You can contact me at @opn too, my nickname is: stratus Mine is Hydroxide. > P.S: I still need 'help' to upload the wml files because i'm an > Debian Applicant. =/ I'm waiting DAM...Full information about my > status: http://nm.debian.org/nmstatus.php?email=stratus%40alternex.com.br You can send me patches at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and I can upload them if they look OK. - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpFfWlwEcNDf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: dupload to archive
On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 02:04:23PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: > and SCP does not, AFAIK, allow for limiting an account to file-copies and > disallowing shell access reliably (so I can't make an anonymous-upload > account). Can't you just set the account's shell to /bin/false or something? You might have to add that to /etc/shells, but that shouldn't be a problem. (Note: I haven't tested this, but I don't see why it wouldn't work.) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Oops. Looks like I need High Speed internet...
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 04:54:08PM -0600, Patrick Klee wrote: > It appears as though I have to download through the eth0. I don't have > cable. Could someone help? Or maybe send a CD? You can buy inexpensive CDs of NetBSD, Linux, and other free OS'es at http://www.cheapbytes.com (and many other places as well). It's one of the few stores where, since the products are so inexpensive, sometimes the shipping is the biggest expense! :-) (And no, I'm not affiliated with them, I just used them once or twice back when I had dial-up and was happy with them.) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: utmpx implementation
On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 11:23:20PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I've implemented utmpx for FreeBSD, and placed it under BSD license. This > should be a standards-compliant (SUSv2) implementation, that is approximately > equivilent to the utmp in glibc or Solaris. The major difference from Linux > is that it uses /var/run/utmpx, and getutent becomes getutxent. Why these different names, then? I would think that it would help compatibility with Linux programs to use the non-"x" names. Or is there another standard that specifies the "x"? - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpNIkhgJ9f0X.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: dpkg architecture and official support
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 10:55:44AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: > Two or three times now, I've run into bugs that were wishlisted or outright > closed because we are not considered an Official Architecture (tm) yet; the > determining factor in this appears to be "are you listed in dpkg's arch > list?" Good idea, I think it's useful to get listed in dpkg for exactly this reason. Being on the official Ports page (probably later tonight or tomorrow) will also help a lot. - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Able to put website on debian.org
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 04:01:22AM -0800, Michael Goetze wrote: > Yup, looks good. I don't quite see why you don't want to move the tarball > over, > though... Speaking of which, how about an updated snapshot? I've got a long Well, I didn't really want to take control of that away from Matthew Garrett. Of course, he could always email me a snapshot and I would put it on the site, if he wants. If that is OK with him, I will go ahead and move the tarball over (or, ideally, put a newer tarball there instead ... possibly in addition to the last one?), but I want to hear that from him directly, so as not to offend him or usurp anything. An updated tarball would be good, I agree :-) Also, since all the feedback I've heard has been good, later tonight I will probably commit the changes to the Debian website, along with adding a link from the ports page. (But that won't be for several hours still.) Right now I'll just put us in the non-Linux ports section of the ports page, but when the other *BSD ports have made their pages, we might be able to group them into a separate section. I should mention: Michael Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> also has read/write access to the website, so that he can put up some info about his work on Debian GNU/NetBSD for Alpha. > One thing that might be nice to have on the website is a kind of "Who's who" > of > Debian */*BSD, e.g. Matthew Garrett, our knight in shining armour, Andreas > Schuldei, the poor guy struggling to do OpenBSD all by himself, Jimmy > Kaplowitz, one of our official DDs and the guy taking care of the website, > etc. > Put me in as someone who has contributed nothing but idle chatter so far. :-) That's a good suggestion, and after I finish getting the site moved over, we can do that. Also, I'd suggest that some of you go to http://cvs.debian.org/?cvsroot=webwml for instructions on checking out the website anonymously, which will enable you to make patches for me to apply to the cvs tree, with changes such as the above. The site uses WML rather than pure HTML, which adds various nice features. Mostly you don't have to worry about this, since HTML is still permissible, but go to http://www.debian.org/devel/website for information on working on the website. We can't forget utsl, the guy trying to do FreeBSD all by himself, either :-) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Able to put website on debian.org
Take a look at http://jimmy.kaplowitz.org/jimmy/debian.org/ports/netbsd/ and see if you like what you see. I have not committed it yet, because it's still too soon to assume that everyone wants me to do so, but you can all now see what it would look like, and give me feedback. I copied Matthew Garrett's page and then did little more than the minimum necessary to make the page validate properly and to give the page the same look and feel as the rest of Debian's site. (There were a couple of other changes, but most of them were minor.) I left alone the off-site links, including the ones pointing to Matt's tarball, which I think is the simplest way to go right now (eventually we will want to put everything on Debian's site, IMHO, but not necessarily yet). Discuss, discuss. :-) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Able to put website on debian.org
Hi. I have been granted read/write access to the Debian website, which means that I can add the NetBSD port to the official website, and I will do so if there are no objections. The only downside is that non-official-Debian-developers can't have read/write access, but they can still contribute to the website by checking out the source anonymously, making changes, and submitting a patch to someone with access. There are two reasons why I think this is worthwhile. First, it would be nice to get the website of an official Debian port away from SourceForge, which is now a showcase for a non-free site engine. Second, since it is an official Debian port, it should be on the official Debian site. There, not on SourceForge, is where people will be looking for any unusual ports of Debian, and if someone hears that there is a NetBSD port for Debian, they'll look on debian.org, not on SourceForge. In my opinion, those who are going to be doing a lot of work on the website (possibly Matthew Garret, for example?) should apply for official Debian developer status. I'll advocate, though unless you can get to New York City you'll need to find someone else to sign your key. Also, anyone who is going to be doing a lot of work on the BSD port in general should apply for that status, because eventually we will be using more of Debian's facilities, many of which are restricted to developers. Those who are doing more casual work on the website or on the rest of the port should simply do the work and send in patches. This works very well with the main Debian website, on which much work is done by non-DDs, and a similar situation is in place regarding sponsored uploads of packages maintained by non-DDs. I may start the job before this, but in order to allow people to object (since this should really be a group decision), I will not finish the job by adding an entry to the main ports page (and appropriate entries elsewhere) until at least tomorrow evening US Eastern Time, or later. I don't want to tear control of the website away from anyone, but I think it would be useful for better publicity and to make our project seem a little bit more official. - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian GNU/NetBSD webspace
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:53:12PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> One day, when the Hurd and BSD ports become more mature, we will definitely
> move the stuff from ports/ into linux-ports/ (or something like that) and
> create hurd-ports/ and bsd-ports/. Or perhaps ports/{linux,hurd,bsd}/.
>
> Until then, ports/netbsd/ should work. OK?
I have no problem with this; I was mistaken in believing that the Hurd
pages were at ports/hurd-i386/ rather than ports/hurd/. It is confusing
having the ports directory be a different name than the architecture
name, but now that I understand this, ports/netbsd/ is fine with me.
> Basically we need a list of people who will work on those web pages, in
> order to know whom to give the appropriate permissions to.
Well, for now just give permissions to me (jimmy) and Michael Weber
(michaelw). I'll take responsibility for copying the existing
debian-bsd.sf.net site over to www.debian.org, and Michael has agreed to
put up a little bit of information about his work on netbsd-alpha. Most
of the active people aren't official Debian developers, but out of those
that are, SPEAK UP and let Josip and me know that you want to work on
the website.
> Once we agree on the location of your stuff, you do whatever you like in
> there, with some general Debian web site standard compliance.
We agree; see above.
> Be sure to read the web pages' web pages (heh) that Alfie pointed you to. We
> don't expect you to read all of it, but do read the introduction sections
> and at least skim over the rest. If you have any questions not answered
> there, don't hesitate to ask.
I have now read (most of) the relevant web pages. I look forward to
working on copying the debian-bsd.sf.net site tonight, in a few hours.
- Jimmy Kaplowitz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian GNU/NetBSD webspace
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 03:54:04PM -0500, Mark Eichin wrote: > You do realize that the "export scripts" mentioned in that article > were recently repaired and re-enabled, right? There was an > announcement of this in the last week or two... Yes, I do realize this, and I received the announcement via email, because I am the admin of a now-defunct SourceForge project that I never bothered to have removed. However, it doesn't change the fact that the last source code release is ancient and that they are now using non-free software in running the site. Plus, we want Debian's ports to be together anyway :-) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian GNU/NetBSD webspace
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 12:41:23PM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: > That's just my opinion, I'm nobody official, just one of the > translator-mob. I propose /ports/netbsd/ and a link to it from > /ports/#nonlinux for it as a start. It should be netbsd-i386, just like hurd-i386. There are other BSD ports in earlier stages of development, including netbsd-alpha, freebsd-i386, and openbsd-i386, but the netbsd-i386 port is furthest along. > You just have to make sure that your pages are available in wml so it > can be generated and translated easily. It's not that hard to switch > from plain html to wml - you sure will find some people that like to > help you for the start. Yes, I looked into this a while ago. It looks interesting :-) > As there are some official debian developers in your team I would > sugguest them to read the pages on working on the website: > <http://www.debian.org/devel/website/working> Including me, for instance? :-) > I guess Josip or some other guy will give you more detailed information > and anwers :) OK. - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU/NetBSD webspace
Hi webmasters. I'm one of the Debianers working on the Debian GNU/NetBSD project mentioned in DWN a little while ago. Would it be possible to get some webspace on the official Debian server? It would be a great opportunity to get us away from SourceForge, which, as you may know, now runs on non-free software[1] and has become somewhat at odds with the morals of Debian. Plus, since there are several Debian developers working on this project, it has at least some official status, and it deserves to be on the official site, though certainly it should have a disclaimer indicating that it is at a very preliminary stage. Thanks for your consideration. (Please CC me and the debian-bsd mailing list on all replies, even though I am subscribed to both -bsd and -www.) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: 1. http://fsfeurope.org/news/article2001-10-20-01.en.html
How to check for a GNU userland
Hi autoconf people. I am one of the people working on the Debian GNU/NetBSD[1] project, which is exactly what it sounds: a project to port Debian to NetBSD, using the GNU userland tools. I am preparing a patch to config.guess to submit to you so that Debian GNU/NetBSD will be recognized, but there is a problem. The uname command will not in any way reflect GNU or Debian, since we will be using NetBSD's kernel. So, what is the best way to check for the GNU userland tools? As a Debian-specific solution, we could check for the existence of /etc/debian_version, but we would prefer to do something more generic in case there are later other flavors of GNU/NetBSD. Any advice will be greatly appreciated. Please CC me and retain the existing CC in all replies, because I and the other Debian GNU/NetBSD people are by and large not subscribed to the autoconf list. - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [1] The question of whether to call it "Debian GNU/NetBSD" or "Debian NetBSD" did not reach a consensus, and there are people on both sides of the issue, but my reading of the thread discussing it indicates that more people wanted the "GNU/" prefix than not, so that's what I'm using here.
Debian GNU/*BSD IRC channel
I just registered #debian-bsd on irc.openprojects.net for the use of the various ports of Debian to BSD. We can chat there and make it something like #debian-devel for BSD porters. Eventually we can use it for port-specific user support, like #debianppc. Let's try to be on there when we have time to chat, or while we're working on Debian BSD (unless we're too deeply engrossed). - Jimmy Kaplowitz (Hydroxide on IRC) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Packaging progress, packaging problems
I was able to build gettext with no problems, and the same with sudo and libtool. Sudo required an /etc/hosts file containing the current computer, as well as the unsetting of the original BSD $SHELL value (from within the chroot), to work correctly, but it works fully, with no errors, once all that is done. Fakeroot seems to be linking with -ldl, which neither exists nor is necessary with NetBSD's libc. How can I get it to avoid linking with -ldl? Except for that I think I have fakeroot compiling OK. Sharutils had an undefined symbol error on _nl_default_dirname, but worked when I disabled nls. What might be wrong with the nls support? The /etc/ld.so.conf file needs to be mode 644 and not mode 600, because with the more restrictive modes, processes running as non-root (yes I have gotten that to work) can't see any of the libs in /lib, such as ncurses. It's an easy change to make. Also, /dev/null needs to be mode 666 and /tmp/ needs to be mode 1777. Various things break otherwise as non-root with Permission denied errors. Next, while compiling vim (without perl/python/tcl/gtk support), I noticed that mkdir foo/ gives a No such directory error, while mkdir foo works fine (note the absence of a slash). This is because the version of GNU fileutils that is included is from 1999 rather than 2001 (version 4.0l rather than 4.1). Apparently fileutils Build-Depends on groff, which needs debconf, which needs dialog. All of those are good things to have, so I'm gonna do them all. I am soon going to make a list of everything in the tarball that is not yet packaged, and I'll make a "filler" package with all that stuff. That way, the thing I describe in the next paragraph can work. Plus, it'll make it very easy to list exactly what we need to package (dpkg -L yet-to-package, for example), and we can steadily remove things from increasing revisions of this package. It'll be like checking things off a list! :-) We'll just have to coordinate who does what, which shouldn't be hard if we all use this list. Also, I'm going to set up debootstrap along with a package mirror (aptable of course) so that we can have people set up their systems "the debian way". (I may even put it in my home directory on an official Debian server.) It basically gets the base .debs, extracts them, and sets up a chrootable environment, all without dpkg or apt. It does any debconf stuff that's required, too (using the noninteractive frontend). And yes I do mean .debs - the binary kind. Do we have any aptable source for those yet? That's more enough for my first substantive email to this list - but see below the sig for a bit more ;-) - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] P. S. - Sorry if I've overstepped any bounds for someone new to the debian-bsd project. I do think I will be able to help out in these important ways, and hopefully do my part to help jumpstart things. If someone else wants to do any of these things instead, just speak up. Or, if you are already working on any of these things, of course speak up and I'll try to be helpful to you if I can be.
Re: Dependancies on libc
Please CC me on all replies, even though I am (finally) subscribed. It works better with my mail sorting setup. On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 09:00:14PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: > Having run into a few packages, now, which have dependancies on specific > GNU libc versions (or rather, libc versions, when all that the packaging > system understands is libc == GNU libc), which compiled just fine under > the NetBSD libc, I come to the following conclusion: > > We should request that a provision be made for desginating which libc is > required, from the developer/policy community. This is not true; GNU libc is called libc6 rather than libc. So there is no conflict. Also, the source packages don't generally have dependencies on libc6, only the compiled binary ones (as makes sense for dynamically linked Linux executables). By the way, in response to your question, I at least am an official Debian developer; are there any others on this project? (This is mainly a question out of curiosity rather than anything else.) To all of you out there: By the way, I will be at the LinuxWorld Expo in New York City from Jan 30 through Feb 1, in the Debian booth. Come by and maybe we can talk about Debian GNU/NetBSD as well as Debian GNU/Linux! Also, I have made some progress regarding packaging useful programs such as sudo (and getting it to work, of course), gettext, sharutils (with nls disabled only), and libtool. I have been having problems getting fakeroot working, but I will post about those separately. Most of the problems I have been able to overcome, but I need a bit of advice on one of them. Consider this my "hi, count me in!" post. - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
