Re: Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian
Steve Langasek writes (Re: Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian): This is interesting to know. Out of curiosity, if you don't intend to license your patch under the Canonical CLA, what was your aim in doing this port? Perhaps the intent is a long-term fork. If someone wants to maintain an open and portable version of upstart then that is surely a good thing. I'm not sure where that puts us; we're certainly interested in seeing a BSD port of upstart, but obviously being unable to integrate that port upstream is less than ideal. Well, _we_ in Debian cannot integrate that upstream - that's up to upstream. This is true of any project: upstream integration is something that upstream decides on. And there is of course nothing stopping upstream from integrating that port themselves - apart from upstream's insistence that they want to be able to take upstart proprietary in the future. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20894.4556.599800.469...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian
Hi Guillem, On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:09:33AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 01:47:42 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: On 22 May 2013 01:16, Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org wrote: Am 22.05.2013 02:00, schrieb Dmitrijs Ledkovs: On 21 May 2013 21:53, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org wrote: On 20/05/13 at 18:19 +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote: - Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon, as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces. Well, Colin Watson, Matthias Klose, Steve Langasek, James Hunt and I have discussed the state of the kfreebsd possibility a few times over the past year or so. I started porting libnih and upstart to GNU/kFreeBSD some months ago, just for fun, whenever I had nothing else to do. But then I'm not interested in assigning my copyright to a for-profit company that is not employing me (and no, this is not a job request); so I didn't post anything yet, because I don't use upstart, didn't want to promise anything (still don't), and it would present as an _interesting_ situation for the Debian upstart maintainers (either reject the patches or carry them forever as a small fork...). This is interesting to know. Out of curiosity, if you don't intend to license your patch under the Canonical CLA, what was your aim in doing this port? I'm not sure where that puts us; we're certainly interested in seeing a BSD port of upstart, but obviously being unable to integrate that port upstream is less than ideal. By chance is there anyone else among the BSD porters who would be more willing to do do such a port under the CLA terms? Or do you think Scott's original suggestion to maintain the bsd port as a separate branch (which for Debian's purposes might imply a separate source package; or else a patch stack in the source package that needs forward-ported after each upstream release) is viable? Oh, FYI, libnih is not covered by the Canonical CLA; Canonical is not the sole copyright holder on it, and Scott, not Canonical, is the upstream maintainer. As mentioned on the porting guide above, waitid() should be replaceable with kqueue's EVFILT_PROC anyway. While it's good in a general sense to know that there are comparable facilities that upstart *could* be ported to on BSD, I don't see a port being successful without direct engagement from a BSD porter. Certainly, I don't see Canonical being the ones to drive this forward. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian
On 22 May 2013 03:09, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote: Hi! On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 01:47:42 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: On 22 May 2013 01:16, Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org wrote: Am 22.05.2013 02:00, schrieb Dmitrijs Ledkovs: On 21 May 2013 21:53, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org wrote: On 20/05/13 at 18:19 +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote: - Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon, as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces. Well, Colin Watson, Matthias Klose, Steve Langasek, James Hunt and I have discussed the state of the kfreebsd possibility a few times over the past year or so. I started porting libnih and upstart to GNU/kFreeBSD some months ago, just for fun, whenever I had nothing else to do. But then I'm not interested in assigning my copyright to a for-profit company that is not employing me (and no, this is not a job request); so I didn't post anything yet, because I don't use upstart, didn't want to promise anything (still don't), and it would present as an _interesting_ situation for the Debian upstart maintainers (either reject the patches or carry them forever as a small fork...). For libnih: fork it, push it, merge propose into https://github.com/keybuk/libnih As Steve already mentioned, Scott is the upstream for libnih. It boiled down to: if we have waitid inotify it should be possible to have a reasonable stab at doing a kfreebsd port for the system-wide upstart init (with libnih and mountall). For session init we currently do use prctl to set subreaper, but one can still have session upstart init without that syscall. Was there something else needed? Or can anyone else spot other big incompatible chunks of code? https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/07/msg00122.html I think I've posted this multiple times, whenever those items lists are posted: http://www.hadrons.org/~guillem/debian/ports/porting And somehow I have missed it up until now. Very nice guide. I like it a lot. Concise pointers =) Regards, Dmitrijs. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANBHLUhwJQKsshXv+_5UkrH=8kyxbdr3vmpr1otl0hu-eij...@mail.gmail.com
Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian
On 21 May 2013 21:53, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org wrote: Hi, On 20/05/13 at 18:19 +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote: Hello, - Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon, as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces. Well, Colin Watson, Matthias Klose, Steve Langasek, James Hunt and I have discussed the state of the kfreebsd possibility a few times over the past year or so. It boiled down to: if we have waitid inotify it should be possible to have a reasonable stab at doing a kfreebsd port for the system-wide upstart init (with libnih and mountall). For session init we currently do use prctl to set subreaper, but one can still have session upstart init without that syscall. Was there something else needed? Or can anyone else spot other big incompatible chunks of code? As it happens, waitid has been recently implemented in the FreeBSD 9.1 kernel [1]. While inotify is not-essential, it's still very nice to have and it can be reasonably sufficiently be implemented for upstart's needs using FreeBSD's kqueue/kevent. It was also roughly felt that code base can be kept reasonably tidy by using weak symbols to encapsulate bsd/linux specific parts of the code base, not dissimilar from how other large projects sometimes choose to handle such portability. [1] If I am correct to trust http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=170346cat= Not sure if it is or when it will be available in debian's kfreebsd port Regards, Dmitrijs. Ubuntu, Debian and Upstart Developer. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANBHLUgm++e4185+a1J=rpy4cpdivvhtkx7uowx0ds66znc...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian
Am 22.05.2013 02:00, schrieb Dmitrijs Ledkovs: On 21 May 2013 21:53, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org wrote: Hi, On 20/05/13 at 18:19 +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote: Hello, - Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon, as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces. Well, Colin Watson, Matthias Klose, Steve Langasek, James Hunt and I have discussed the state of the kfreebsd possibility a few times over the past year or so. It boiled down to: if we have waitid inotify it should be possible to have a reasonable stab at doing a kfreebsd port for the system-wide upstart init (with libnih and mountall). For session init we currently do use prctl to set subreaper, but one can still have session upstart init without that syscall. Was there something else needed? Or can anyone else spot other big incompatible chunks of code? https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/07/msg00122.html Nothing really happened since 2009, so I wouldn't hold my breath regarding a *BSD port. -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian
On 22 May 2013 01:16, Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org wrote: Am 22.05.2013 02:00, schrieb Dmitrijs Ledkovs: On 21 May 2013 21:53, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org wrote: Hi, On 20/05/13 at 18:19 +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote: Hello, - Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon, as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces. Well, Colin Watson, Matthias Klose, Steve Langasek, James Hunt and I have discussed the state of the kfreebsd possibility a few times over the past year or so. It boiled down to: if we have waitid inotify it should be possible to have a reasonable stab at doing a kfreebsd port for the system-wide upstart init (with libnih and mountall). For session init we currently do use prctl to set subreaper, but one can still have session upstart init without that syscall. Was there something else needed? Or can anyone else spot other big incompatible chunks of code? https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/07/msg00122.html Going down the list: - inotify - internetz tell me kevents/kqueue is the way to go - waitid() - issue closed in FreeBSD in February 2013, is it usable? - epoll, eventfd, signalfd, timerfd - again internetz tell me kevents/kqueue can do all of this, better yet there is libevent that can do those portably across linux and bsd - ptrace - FreeBSD does have ptrace - differences in api/capabilities? I didn't know about either of these =) looks awesome. Need to look into how upstart is using those, to see how necessary those are and how to implement them on FreeBSD. - netlink proc connector - netlink udev interface Nothing really happened since 2009, so I wouldn't hold my breath regarding a *BSD port. Apart from FreeBSD folks implementing just recently waitid()?! =))) That's huge. Regards, Dmitrijs. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANBHLUj-bgXPfJ=uneDR4Nk=5jerSZOHzptvJ=hfcub731s...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian
Hi! On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 01:47:42 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: On 22 May 2013 01:16, Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org wrote: Am 22.05.2013 02:00, schrieb Dmitrijs Ledkovs: On 21 May 2013 21:53, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org wrote: On 20/05/13 at 18:19 +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote: - Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon, as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces. Well, Colin Watson, Matthias Klose, Steve Langasek, James Hunt and I have discussed the state of the kfreebsd possibility a few times over the past year or so. I started porting libnih and upstart to GNU/kFreeBSD some months ago, just for fun, whenever I had nothing else to do. But then I'm not interested in assigning my copyright to a for-profit company that is not employing me (and no, this is not a job request); so I didn't post anything yet, because I don't use upstart, didn't want to promise anything (still don't), and it would present as an _interesting_ situation for the Debian upstart maintainers (either reject the patches or carry them forever as a small fork...). It boiled down to: if we have waitid inotify it should be possible to have a reasonable stab at doing a kfreebsd port for the system-wide upstart init (with libnih and mountall). For session init we currently do use prctl to set subreaper, but one can still have session upstart init without that syscall. Was there something else needed? Or can anyone else spot other big incompatible chunks of code? https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/07/msg00122.html I think I've posted this multiple times, whenever those items lists are posted: http://www.hadrons.org/~guillem/debian/ports/porting Going down the list: - inotify - internetz tell me kevents/kqueue is the way to go - waitid() - issue closed in FreeBSD in February 2013, is it usable? - epoll, eventfd, signalfd, timerfd - again internetz tell me kevents/kqueue can do all of this, better yet there is libevent that can do those portably across linux and bsd - ptrace - FreeBSD does have ptrace - differences in api/capabilities? ptrace has some parts commonly implemented in most (if not all) Unices, and some other system specific ones. I didn't know about either of these =) looks awesome. Need to look into how upstart is using those, to see how necessary those are and how to implement them on FreeBSD. - netlink proc connector - netlink udev interface Nothing really happened since 2009, so I wouldn't hold my breath regarding a *BSD port. Apart from FreeBSD folks implementing just recently waitid()?! =))) That's huge. 20121124212846.ga10...@gaara.hadrons.org 20121124232556.ga17...@gaara.hadrons.org As mentioned on the porting guide above, waitid() should be replaceable with kqueue's EVFILT_PROC anyway. Thanks, Guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130522020933.ga15...@gaara.hadrons.org
Re: Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian
On Wednesday, May 22, 2013 04:09:33 AM Guillem Jover wrote: ... ... But then I'm not interested in assigning my copyright to a for-profit company that is not employing me ... ... It may be a distinction without difference from your perspective, but in the interests of precision, they no longer require copyright assignment. They require a license that (particularly ironically in this case) gives them fewer rights than BSD license would. Scott K -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/18018402.4v1aZSkW8q@scott-latitude-e6320
Re: Upstart kFreeBSD port for Debian
On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 22:16:46 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: On Wednesday, May 22, 2013 04:09:33 AM Guillem Jover wrote: ... ... But then I'm not interested in assigning my copyright to a for-profit company that is not employing me ... ... It may be a distinction without difference from your perspective, but in the interests of precision, they no longer require copyright assignment. They require a license that (particularly ironically in this case) gives them fewer rights than BSD license would. Ah, thanks for the correction Scott, I've now read the CLA, and while not assigning copyright is marginally better, it's still unacceptable. I'd not have much of a problem if the project was under a BSD license (although I usually prefer copyleft licenses), because then everyone is on the same footing. Or if the organization was a non-profit w/ a promise to never release as proprietary like the FSF, for which I have copyright assignments on file, for example. Anyway. Thanks, Guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130522031357.ga18...@gaara.hadrons.org
