Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, such port makes sense and solves some of the issues (mostly GNU
libc portability) but unfortunately creates new issues, which I'm sure,
could be worked out and soon we should have more or less working first
ISO available with support for this new
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Debian's main issue is that parts of Sun's libc are not open (mostly
libc_i18n; they require all bits to be open). Having seen the issues
kFreeBSD has had with using glibc with their kernel, I'm not sure if
its work having a ksolaris port since
Right. And in addition to autotools, such port complicates further ON
merges which will unavoidably lead to higher rate of errors/bugs.
But because GNU/kFreeBSD exists, I do not see why GNU/kOpenSolaris can't
be...
On Fri, 2008-09-19 at 09:27 -0400, Michael Casadevall wrote:
-BEGIN PGP
The kFreeBSD port has had a lot of considerable issues with porting
software. Remember, we'd need to port the ON tools such as the ZFS
admin tools to glibc.
http://wiki.debian.org/ArchiveQualification/kfreebsd-i386
They also haven't been able to get things like the wifi tools for
FreeBSD
To me, this development is just yet another Debian architecture and
sure, some in Debian community will like. It also connects to Nexenta in
many ways - which is good for us. We can't stop such port from happening
- so I think we should embrace it as a secondary lefty architecture.
On Fri,
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Michael Casadevall
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The kFreeBSD port has had a lot of considerable issues with porting
software. Remember, we'd need to port the ON tools such as the ZFS
admin tools to glibc.
I already have zfs and zpool binaries linked and working
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I don't have a problem with two separate ports. Like for people who
want Solaris based system for stability and ZFS, and a solaris based
one. A nice and practical upshot of this is the possibility of a
kopensolaris-amd64 port which has been a bit of
