Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
Duncan Barclay wrote: I have in my archives some code from the "person" who usually brings up the logical name stuff (the code implements them). However, there is also this snippet: PS: if you need the changes to namei() for variant symbolic links, ask me nicely, and I will disentangle them from my other changes to namei() for layering fixes, Unicode, and alternate namespace support (used by a modified (CIFS enhanced) Samba server which needs to have the DOS short name remain constant across directory searches). So who wants to ask him for them? The funny thing is... I'd have more trouble identifying the author of a snippet from a mail by my own mother than that snippet above. :-) (otoh, that's not funny... that' scary! :) -- Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS) [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Sentience hurts." To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
Anyone remember the old Pyramid OSX 'universe' command? In the mid-80s, when the "System V" versus "BSD" dichotomy was in full bloom, Pyramid delivered a system with two "universes" available. A user could specify 'universe bsd' and work in a pure BSD environment; 'universe att' placed you in a pure S5 environment (of the time). A user in the BSD environment could "cross the line" by issuing a command like "att ls", or even "att cc ". The universe was marked by a flag which affected the interpretation of "conditional symbolic links". A separate syscall was available to create conditional symbolic links. Sequent also implemented conditional symbolic links, although I seem to recall that the Pyramid implementation was a bit more complete. How about a 'FreeBSD' universe and a 'Linux' universe? Of course, you need a "complete" set of utilities for each universe (for some definition of "complete"). On 24-May-00 Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: 1. You can run /compat/linux/bin/bash and then you in a sort of Linux/FreeBSD directory mix. The root directory looks just like your FreeBSD root, but changing to a directory that is in /compat/linux, like /bin, will put in the linux tree of this directory, but changing to a directory that doesn't exist, like /home, will keep you in the FreeBSD Well, what do you know - you're right! :) I learn something new every day. I've found the Linux emulation on FreeBSD to be one of the best, most integrated emulation I've ever seen of anything. I've messed around with it quite a bit and discovered quite a few nifty tricks you can do. I've never actually tried it, but I think you could probably compile Linux binaries under FreeBSD by installing the Linux version of gcc and using it. There used to be a linux-devel port which did exactly this. Don't know what became of it, however.. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message -- Duane H. Hesser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
Anyone remember the old Pyramid OSX 'universe' command?
Yes, I do. It was very evil. :)
The way Apollo solved this problem was much more elegant and general
purpose and one of my favorite soapbox topics: Variant symlinks.
Rather than using the "universe" concept for getting at a different
command set, Apollo gave you the ability to expand variable names
inside of symlinks, e.g. "ln -s /bin.${OSTYPE} /bin" would cause
/bin to point to /bin.sysv if OSTYPE=sysv or /bin.bsd if OSTYPE=bsd.
Using that, you could create something very similar to a Pyramid
dual-universe environment with the added bonus of also being able to
use it for localization purposes, selecting different documentation
sets, whatever.
Of course, every time we've had this discussion in the past, people
usually jump in and say that the environment variable space is
insufficiently powerful for this and what we really need is something
more like VMS logical names where you can have system-wide, group-wide
and user-specific variables which then are applied to the variant
symlink expansion.
At that point, everyone generally agrees that it's too hard to do and
we should put off the entire concept for another couple of years. :)
- Jordan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On 25-May-00 Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: Anyone remember the old Pyramid OSX 'universe' command? Yes, I do. It was very evil. :) The way Apollo solved this problem was much more elegant and general purpose and one of my favorite soapbox topics: Variant symlinks. Gosh is that the time...must be going soon... [snip] Of course, every time we've had this discussion in the past, people usually jump in and say that the environment variable space is insufficiently powerful for this and what we really need is something more like VMS logical names where you can have system-wide, group-wide and user-specific variables which then are applied to the variant symlink expansion. At that point, everyone generally agrees that it's too hard to do and we should put off the entire concept for another couple of years. :) I have in my archives some code from the "person" who usually brings up the logical name stuff (the code implements them). However, there is also this snippet: PS: if you need the changes to namei() for variant symbolic links, ask me nicely, and I will disentangle them from my other changes to namei() for layering fixes, Unicode, and alternate namespace support (used by a modified (CIFS enhanced) Samba server which needs to have the DOS short name remain constant across directory searches). So who wants to ask him for them? - Jordan Duncan, with tongue firmly in left cheek. --- Duncan Barclay | God smiles upon the little children, [EMAIL PROTECTED] | the alcoholics, and the permanently stoned. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
I have in my archives some code from the "person" who usually brings up the logical name stuff (the code implements them). AIE. OK, I think this thread will probably die in *record* time now. I'm certainly running for the hills as we speak. :-) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
James Howard wrote: Since I mention it, does anyone know the major differences between SCO's new SVR5 (Unixware 7) and traditional SVR4 implementations? Going to SCO's website all I get is market-speak. As I've been told it was named SVR5 to mark inclusion of enterprise-level features (and yes, for marketing reasons): - better CPU scalability with modular support for different platforms (initially UW7 was up to 8 CPUs well and 12 CPUs so-so, now up to 16 CPUs well) - support for over 4GB of memory - support for large areas of shared memory attached to great many processes - multi-path I/O support (a disk can be connected to 2 or more SCSI buses) - integrated volume manager (from Veritas, terrible thing, and often broken) - hot-swappable disks - hot-pluggable PCI cards - high availablilty clustering (Reliant from Veritas, terrible thing, and sometimes broken) Internally it had significant extensions in the multiprocessor support, memory and re-designed I/O subsystem. -SB To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On the other hand, the FreeBSD kernel is superior than that of Linux. Yes, and FreeBSD is also superior to every Linux distribution I have seen. Although SuSE is pretty good. And my penis is _SO_ much larger than yours. Large penises are _ALWAYS_ better, of course. -MB To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
Perhaps we should go just a bit further with that approach and make things _write_ into that hierarchy first as well, e.g. if you run /compat/linux/bin/bash and then install something with rpm, it will install (as far as it's concerned) into /usr/bin, /usr/lib, etc. but really be chrooted into the /compat/linux hierarchy and only affect things there. Actually, I'm pretty sure that this does work as has since the 3.2 tree, when I thought to try it and see if it would. You actually have 2 options. 1. You can run /compat/linux/bin/bash and then you in a sort of Linux/FreeBSD directory mix. The root directory looks just like your FreeBSD root, but changing to a directory that is in /compat/linux, like /bin, will put in the linux tree of this directory, but changing to a directory that doesn't exist, like /home, will keep you in the FreeBSD structure. This is very close to being able to run FreeBSD and Linux at the same time (/bin/csh in one xterm and /compat/linux/bin/bash in another). Within this, you can do an rpm or any linux command and you will be operating on the Linux/FreeBSD mix directory structure. 2. Just run /compat/linux/bin/rpm (or any other command in /compat/linux) and you will be operating on the Linux directory structure as described above. I've found the Linux emulation on FreeBSD to be one of the best, most integrated emulation I've ever seen of anything. I've messed around with it quite a bit and discovered quite a few nifty tricks you can do. I've never actually tried it, but I think you could probably compile Linux binaries under FreeBSD by installing the Linux version of gcc and using it. Very cool stuff. Keep up the excellent work! --- Preston Wiley GoTo.Com, Inc. Systems Administrator 1820 Gateway Drive, Suite 300 [EMAIL PROTECTED] San Mateo, CA 94404 650/403-2227 http://www.cadabra.com --- To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
1. You can run /compat/linux/bin/bash and then you in a sort of Linux/FreeBSD directory mix. The root directory looks just like your FreeBSD root, but changing to a directory that is in /compat/linux, like /bin, will put in the linux tree of this directory, but changing to a directory that doesn't exist, like /home, will keep you in the FreeBSD Well, what do you know - you're right! :) I learn something new every day. I've found the Linux emulation on FreeBSD to be one of the best, most integrated emulation I've ever seen of anything. I've messed around with it quite a bit and discovered quite a few nifty tricks you can do. I've never actually tried it, but I think you could probably compile Linux binaries under FreeBSD by installing the Linux version of gcc and using it. There used to be a linux-devel port which did exactly this. Don't know what became of it, however.. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On Wed, May 24, 2000 at 12:07:06AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: There used to be a linux-devel port which did exactly this. Don't know what became of it, however.. [hawk-billf] /home/billf cat /usr/ports/devel/linux_devtools/pkg/COMMENT Packages needed for doing development in Linux mode -- Bill Fumerola - Network Architect / Computer Horizons Corp - CVM e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On Wed, 24 May 2000, Daniel O'Connor wrote: On 24-May-00 Mohit Aron wrote: Yes, that looks promising. That'll possibly enable one to install rpms easily on FreeBSD. You can try this too.. rpm --ignoreos --root /compat/linux --dbbath /var/lib/rpm --nodeps --replacepkgs foo.rpm Or: /compat/linux/bin/bash rpm Running Linux-based installers directly in the FreeBSD environment can Cause Problems(tm), particularly if they're shells scripts that make assumptions. Doug White| FreeBSD: The Power to Serve [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
:Or: : :/compat/linux/bin/bash :rpm : :Running Linux-based installers directly in the FreeBSD environment can :Cause Problems(tm), particularly if they're shells scripts that make :assumptions. : :Doug White| FreeBSD: The Power to Serve :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.FreeBSD.org That should be mostly fixed now, actually, insofar as you have the correct linux utilities installed in /compat/linux (so the scripts don't break-out of the linux emulation by running freebsd utilities which then turn around and try to run other scripts). -Matt Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
Hi, I apologize beforehand if this topic has already been discussed at length here or elsewhere. More and more commerical sites are providing software packages that contain binaries for Linux. While FreeBSD does provide Linux emulation, this is often flaky and breaks down more often than not for commercial software. On the other hand, the FreeBSD kernel is superior than that of Linux. Since FreeBSD and Linux have so much in common wrt to the user interface to the kernel, wouldn't it be so much better if both had the SAME interface such that the Linux kernel could just be replaced by the FreeBSD kernel. That way, one would be able to take advantage of both the increasing development of software for Linux, as well as the strengths of the FreeBSD kernel. It would give FreeBSD much greater visibility. Can someone comment on how difficult achieving the above would be ? - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 This is definately a matter of opinion. First of all, FreeBSD's kernel can use both the Linux and FreeBSD interfaces at once. Although it might be possible to remove the FreeBSD interfaces, then all you have are the Linux ones - it sounds like a loss in functionality to me. Second, the Linux emulator is actually extremely good - even very complex threaded programs work perfectly. Problems do exist, but these are mostly in the /dev tree and drivers, not in the call interface. Sound, video framebuffers, and SVGAlib all work, but only barely. Thus I think the only advantage would be that FreeBSD userspace apps could use glibc, which is nice, but would break the copyrights on both trees :). If you're really interested in this kind of OS hybridism, why not use the GNU/FreeBSD system put out by Debian a while back? -- Dan Feldman Hacker, webmaster and computer connoisseur Out of sight, out of mind, out of hand. On Tue, 23 May 2000, Mohit Aron wrote: Hi, I apologize beforehand if this topic has already been discussed at length here or elsewhere. More and more commerical sites are providing software packages that contain binaries for Linux. While FreeBSD does provide Linux emulation, this is often flaky and breaks down more often than not for commercial software. On the other hand, the FreeBSD kernel is superior than that of Linux. Since FreeBSD and Linux have so much in common wrt to the user interface to the kernel, wouldn't it be so much better if both had the SAME interface such that the Linux kernel could just be replaced by the FreeBSD kernel. That way, one would be able to take advantage of both the increasing development of software for Linux, as well as the strengths of the FreeBSD kernel. It would give FreeBSD much greater visibility. Can someone comment on how difficult achieving the above would be ? - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE5Kz4Zm5zE2gDgwPgRAkSaAJ9UuBDhs/SB5sN3/ItWYNqUSakA9gCgk2Pq 6CTjl972u8UOej+gFqA0m3c= =KY/T -END PGP SIGNATURE- To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
That sounds a lot like the DaemonLinux project: http://synack.net/daemonlinux/ Except it appears to have died stillborn. And not without reason. Their proposal aimed to replace FSF utilities with BSD equivalents - I don't think they are considering the kernel as a utility. I don't really any benefit from this. The binaries being distributed for Linux make use of Linux utilities (whether or not they are from FSF) and it makes little sense to replace them. Replacing the kernel though - that's another matter. - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
We already have a pretty complete implementation of the Linux kernel ABI - most of the problems with running Linux binaries on FreeBSD comes from userland stuff: missing libraries, etc. It's not "Linux emulation" - see http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/x18949.html Yes, which is why I'd rather use GNU utilities running on FreeBSD than spend hours figuring out how to make a Linux binary work. As someone pointed out, Debian is making some effort in this direction. I'll check that out. - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Here's a Slashdot article about Debian/FreeBSD. It has links and a LOT of angry comments :). http://slashdot.org/bsd/99/11/23/1939210.shtml -- Dan Feldman Hacker, webmaster and computer connoisseur Out of sight, out of mind, out of hand. On Tue, 23 May 2000, Mohit Aron wrote: First of all, FreeBSD's kernel can use both the Linux and FreeBSD interfaces at once. Although it might be possible to remove the FreeBSD interfaces, then all you have are the Linux ones - it sounds like a loss in functionality to me. Second, the Linux emulator is actually extremely good - even very complex threaded programs work perfectly. Problems do exist, but these are mostly in the /dev tree and drivers, not in the call interface. Sound, video framebuffers, and SVGAlib all work, but only barely. Thus I think the only advantage would be that FreeBSD userspace apps could use glibc, which is nice, but would break the copyrights on both trees :). Also, package installs are rather troublesome (unless you install from FreeBSD ports). By default any libraries tend to be installed in /usr/lib whereas they should go in /compat/linux/usr/lib and so on. Its hard to get Linux binary packages from the Internet to install easily on FreeBSD. If you're really interested in this kind of OS hybridism, why not use the GNU/FreeBSD system put out by Debian a while back? Yes, that'll be perfect for me (and for so many other users wanting to use FreeBSD on their desktop). I looked at Debian's webpages - couldn't find the GNU/FreeBSD system. However, I'll take a closer look. Thanks, - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE5K0SVm5zE2gDgwPgRAk9OAJ494UtuxXA8NepSxOWkaMS44OuGtACgnjoS wXNofBDy7nRLe9I0Gk4uh3U= =brOM -END PGP SIGNATURE- To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 08:56:18PM -0500, Mohit Aron wrote: Hi, I apologize beforehand if this topic has already been discussed at length here or elsewhere. More and more commerical sites are providing software packages that contain binaries for Linux. While FreeBSD does provide Linux emulation, this is often flaky and breaks down more often than not for commercial software. I do not agree with this last statement. I have had success with every Linux program I have thrown at FreeBSD. Of course I have not tried them all but my experience has been good. On the other hand, the FreeBSD kernel is superior than that of Linux. Yes, and FreeBSD is also superior to every Linux distribution I have seen. Although SuSE is pretty good. Since FreeBSD and Linux have so much in common wrt to the user interface to the kernel, wouldn't it be so much better if both had the SAME interface such that the Linux kernel could just be replaced by the FreeBSD kernel. That way, one would be able to take advantage of both the increasing development of software for Linux, as well as the strengths of the FreeBSD kernel. It would give FreeBSD much greater visibility. Can someone comment on how difficult achieving the above would be ? I think you need to keep in mind that FreeBSD is more than just the kernel, in contrast to Linux. The tight integration and control of all of the userspace tools makes system management much easier IMHO with FreeBSD than any Linux distribution I have used. This is especially true when you have a fleet of machines to keep up to date. I think you are right though that visibility need to be increased to attract commercial developers but I think the only way to do that is to steadily grow the user base. -- Glenn Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Mohit Aron wrote: Yes, which is why I'd rather use GNU utilities running on FreeBSD than spend hours figuring out how to make a Linux binary work. As someone pointed out, Debian is making some effort in this direction. I'll check that out. Oh I see, you're looking for a replacement FreeBSD userland, not a retargetted FreeBSD kernel. It's been a while since I've done it, but if you just install e.g. a Debian snapshot and chroot to it then just about everything should work. Some of the "system administration" syscalls may not work (have not been implemented), but once someone identifies what they are they could be in theory be implemented without too much trouble. This is different to the Debian/FreeBSD effort, which was aiming to get source-code compilation of Linux userland under FreeBSD and is therefore harder (I suspect that project has kind of died). Kris In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write: We already have a pretty complete implementation of the Linux kernel ABI - most of the problems with running Linux binaries on FreeBSD comes from userland stuff: missing libraries, etc. It's not "Linux emulation" - see http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/x18949.html Yes, which is why I'd rather use GNU utilities running on FreeBSD than spend hours figuring out how to make a Linux binary work. As someone pointed out, Debian is making some effort in this direction. I'll check that out. Also note that I just added ext2fs support to our bootloader, so with a little more effort, you might be able to drop a fbsd kernel into an existing Linux system and have it boot. There will the enevitable bunch of issues to iron out as well, so it's probably not as simple as it sounds. -- Jonathan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
I think you need to keep in mind that FreeBSD is more than just the kernel, in contrast to Linux. The tight integration and control of all of the userspace tools makes system management much easier IMHO with FreeBSD than any Linux distribution I have used. This is especially true when you have a fleet of machines to keep up to date. I think you are right though that visibility need to be increased to attract commercial developers but I think the only way to do that is to steadily grow the user base. Well, I'm not about to give up FreeBSD running on my desktop, but at times it is frustrating to not being able to use so much stuff out there that's meant to work for Linux but doesn't work for FreeBSD for one small reason or another. I think the user base can only grow if it is as easy to use third-party applications on FreeBSD as on Linux. - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
First of all, FreeBSD's kernel can use both the Linux and FreeBSD interfaces at once. Although it might be possible to remove the FreeBSD interfaces, then all you have are the Linux ones - it sounds like a loss in functionality to me. Second, the Linux emulator is actually extremely good - even very complex threaded programs work perfectly. Problems do exist, but these are mostly in the /dev tree and drivers, not in the call interface. Sound, video framebuffers, and SVGAlib all work, but only barely. Thus I think the only advantage would be that FreeBSD userspace apps could use glibc, which is nice, but would break the copyrights on both trees :). Also, package installs are rather troublesome (unless you install from FreeBSD ports). By default any libraries tend to be installed in /usr/lib whereas they should go in /compat/linux/usr/lib and so on. Its hard to get Linux binary packages from the Internet to install easily on FreeBSD. If you're really interested in this kind of OS hybridism, why not use the GNU/FreeBSD system put out by Debian a while back? Yes, that'll be perfect for me (and for so many other users wanting to use FreeBSD on their desktop). I looked at Debian's webpages - couldn't find the GNU/FreeBSD system. However, I'll take a closer look. Thanks, - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Mohit Aron wrote: And not without reason. Their proposal aimed to replace FSF utilities with BSD equivalents - I don't think they are considering the kernel as a utility. I don't really any benefit from this. The binaries being distributed for Linux make use of Linux utilities (whether or not they are from FSF) and it makes little sense to replace them. Replacing the kernel though - that's another matter. Actually, I went backwards. My mistake. Not that getting rid of GNU tools is an all bad idea... :) Jamie To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The thing is, using Linux applications on Linux isn't all that easy. There definately needs to be a better packaging system, but that won't happen anytime soon. On the other hand, commercial apps usually have very precise instructions as to what one should do. If you're a little creative you can generally break the rules to get these to run on FreeBSD. For instance, I installed StarOffice by timing the length of the binary first-stage installer (which is broken on my FreeBSD system), running it again and stopping it just before it finishes, and then finding the newly-extracted second-stage installer in the /tmp directory. (I'm pretty sure the installer works better on newer versions of FreeBSD). I think the answer is more to convince application vendors to go the extra inch and write a back-up install script that's a little more portable than their fancy GUI things, rather than asking the kernel hackers to go the extra mile to ensure every Linux program works perfectly. -- Dan Feldman Hacker, webmaster and computer connoisseur Out of sight, out of mind, out of hand. Visit http://messenger.ghs.ssd.k12.wa.us/, okay? On Tue, 23 May 2000, Mohit Aron wrote: I think you need to keep in mind that FreeBSD is more than just the kernel, in contrast to Linux. The tight integration and control of all of the userspace tools makes system management much easier IMHO with FreeBSD than any Linux distribution I have used. This is especially true when you have a fleet of machines to keep up to date. I think you are right though that visibility need to be increased to attract commercial developers but I think the only way to do that is to steadily grow the user base. Well, I'm not about to give up FreeBSD running on my desktop, but at times it is frustrating to not being able to use so much stuff out there that's meant to work for Linux but doesn't work for FreeBSD for one small reason or another. I think the user base can only grow if it is as easy to use third-party applications on FreeBSD as on Linux. - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE5K03fm5zE2gDgwPgRAvn5AJ4g0lYYnEAHe0KvzK4zxcZ8Kn1bywCfZPIp ICXJNU6U/Blg049xrED09k8= =13gl -END PGP SIGNATURE- To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Mohit Aron wrote: Well, I'm not about to give up FreeBSD running on my desktop, but at times it is frustrating to not being able to use so much stuff out there that's meant to work for Linux but doesn't work for FreeBSD for one small reason or another. I think the user base can only grow if it is as easy to use third-party applications on FreeBSD as on Linux. It would be good if you pointed out these problems through PRs or at least a message to the appropriate list so that they could be fixed. Jamie To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On the other hand, commercial apps usually have very precise instructions as to what one should do. If you're a little creative you can generally break the rules to get these to run on FreeBSD. For instance, I installed StarOffice by timing the length of the binary first-stage installer (which is broken on my FreeBSD system), running it again and stopping it just before it finishes, and then finding the newly-extracted second-stage installer in the /tmp directory. (I'm pretty sure the installer works better on newer versions of FreeBSD). Yes, making StarOffice work for FreeBSD was a real pain - before FreeBSD put out the port that is. Your example above also demonstrates how difficult it is sometimes to get Linux related stuff to work on FreeBSD. I believe even to make netscape plugins (for Linux) work, you need to use the linux version of netscape - not the FreeBSD one (at least this used to be true some time back). All these nifty things really scare any new users away from FreeBSD. I think the answer is more to convince application vendors to go the extra inch and write a back-up install script that's a little more portable than their fancy GUI things, rather than asking the kernel hackers to go the extra mile to ensure every Linux program works perfectly. Which clearly is an impossible job. Much easier to convince one party than to convince the one million vendors out there. :) But seriously, I think the problem can be fixed with a more transparent interface for Linux programs. Rather than requiring Linux libraries to be put in /compat/linux, it would be much easier if everything could be put in /usr/lib. Which probably means having the SAME interface as Linux. - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
But seriously, I think the problem can be fixed with a more transparent interface for Linux programs. Rather than requiring Linux libraries to be put in /compat/linux, it would be much easier if everything could be put in /usr/lib. Which probably means having the SAME interface as Linux. That would also result in a highly undesirable mish-mash of binaries in one's /usr/lib, nor do I see the real advantage since the linux compatability shim will look in /compat/linux/usr/lib first anyway. Perhaps we should go just a bit further with that approach and make things _write_ into that hierarchy first as well, e.g. if you run /compat/linux/bin/bash and then install something with rpm, it will install (as far as it's concerned) into /usr/bin, /usr/lib, etc. but really be chrooted into the /compat/linux hierarchy and only affect things there. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On 24-May-00 Mohit Aron wrote: But seriously, I think the problem can be fixed with a more transparent interface for Linux programs. Rather than requiring Linux libraries to be put in /compat/linux, it would be much easier if everything could be put in /usr/lib. Which probably means having the SAME interface as Linux. Why would somthing like that happen? I don't particularly want some Linux guy inventing a new library which has the same name as a system library and then spamming something vital in /usr/lib If its in /compat/linux at least its segregated, and doesn't screw something vital up. --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
Perhaps we should go just a bit further with that approach and make things _write_ into that hierarchy first as well, e.g. if you run /compat/linux/bin/bash and then install something with rpm, it will install (as far as it's concerned) into /usr/bin, /usr/lib, etc. but really be chrooted into the /compat/linux hierarchy and only affect things there. Yes, that looks promising. That'll possibly enable one to install rpms easily on FreeBSD. - Mohit To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On 24-May-00 Mohit Aron wrote: Yes, that looks promising. That'll possibly enable one to install rpms easily on FreeBSD. You can try this too.. rpm --ignoreos --root /compat/linux --dbbath /var/lib/rpm --nodeps --replacepkgs foo.rpm I did this to install Linux gtk libs a while ago and it worked (note its stolen from the linux_base port) --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Mohit Aron wrote: I believe even to make netscape plugins (for Linux) work, you need to use the linux version of netscape - not the FreeBSD one (at least this used to be true some time back). All these nifty things really scare any new users away from FreeBSD. You can't mix and match Linux syscalls and FreeBSD syscalls in the same program - the kernel has no way to know how it should interpret them. But seriously, I think the problem can be fixed with a more transparent interface for Linux programs. Rather than requiring Linux libraries to be put in /compat/linux, it would be much easier if everything could be put in /usr/lib. Which probably means having the SAME interface as Linux. No thanks. Firstly there's the fact that many files exist in both Linux and FreeBSD versions, but don't work the same (e.g. GNU versions of system utilities), and secondly there's the fact that I don't want my system being spammed by a zillion linux files amongst my "native" ones with no way to tell which is which. Then there's the issue of shared libraries, which combines with problem #2 and leads to the problem in my first paragraph mentioned above. Kris In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD kernel as a replacement for Linux kernel
: But seriously, I think the problem can be fixed with a more transparent : interface for Linux programs. Rather than requiring Linux libraries to be put : in /compat/linux, it would be much easier if everything could be put in : /usr/lib. Which probably means having the SAME interface as Linux. : :That would also result in a highly undesirable mish-mash of binaries :in one's /usr/lib, nor do I see the real advantage since the linux :compatability shim will look in /compat/linux/usr/lib first anyway. : :Perhaps we should go just a bit further with that approach and make :things _write_ into that hierarchy first as well, e.g. if you run :/compat/linux/bin/bash and then install something with rpm, it will :install (as far as it's concerned) into /usr/bin, /usr/lib, etc. but :really be chrooted into the /compat/linux hierarchy and only affect :things there. : :- Jordan I see the ports system as being our saving grace here, at least in regards to installing commercial linux applications. I don't like the idea of 'writing to /compat/linux' first, if only because the 'try reading from /compat/linux then give up and try /' idea that we are already using doesn't have a good track record -- it creates a lot of confusion already. The writing will create even more. I think the best solution is to have the linux compatibility code chroot to /compat/linux right off the bat (when a FreeBSD binary exec's a linux binary), and then we get rid of all the 'try /compat/linux first' junk from the kernel. Things that we want to share, like /usr/home, we can mount under /compat/linux... all it requires is a someone to finish cleaning up the null device (I am not volunteering, I don't have time :-( ). In any case, with just a few strategic directories shared like that, in a chroot'd environment, I think the linux environment can be made to work very nicely under FreeBSD. -Matt Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
