What's happening to FreeBSD?

R

rotor

Is FreeBSD going down the path of MS Windows, i.e., a wall of complexity is a goal?

The new package-oriented updates of the OS are a major step backwards from the prior ease of keeping FreeBSD up to date.

Has there been a major change in the long-term goals of FreeBSD?
 
There is no OS.
- There is KERNEL
- There is BASE
- There are PACKAGES

The 3 together form the OS.

- Me i just build a few ports (20) with poudriere.
- Then for all ports (1500) i do "pkg update -f" , "pkg upgrade".

"freebsd-version -kru"
"pkg prime-origins"
 
rotor said:
Is FreeBSD going down the path of MS Windows, i.e., a wall of complexity is a goal?

The new package-oriented updates of the OS are a major step backwards from the prior ease of keeping FreeBSD up to date.

Has there been a major change in the long-term goals of FreeBSD?
Click to expand...
take a look -
vermaden

Thread 'Brave New PKGBASE World'

Original article here.
Consider this when replying.

FreeBSD, The FreeBSD Foundation, and The FreeBSD Forums are not associated with the content of this article.
  • Thanks
  • Like
 
lanin said:
take a look -
vermaden

Thread 'Brave New PKGBASE World'

Original article here.
Consider this when replying.

FreeBSD, The FreeBSD Foundation, and The FreeBSD Forums are not associated with the content of this article.
  • Thanks
  • Like
Click to expand...
How far is this? I made a mfsroot-based system that theoretically can run 1 program after the kernel but that's not really interesting. A solid dependency tree of world components would be nice, though. Trying something with compiler options gets complicated fast.
 
pkgbase is one thing. Whether you like it or not, nobody stepped forward to maintain freebsd-update forever.

rcd is a different matter, is it gets to be pid 1. But the proposal for that makes sense to me and the improved functionality is worth the complexity (for me).
 
drhowarddrfine said:
rotor It's not complex. It's different. In the long run it's better than before cause it eases its development.
It's not difficult to learn or use and you'll find that out once you use it.
Click to expand...
Agree completely but for me personally, I can wait until it becomes the default, which implies most of the bugs are shaken out.

cracauer@ I agree on rcd.
 
I cannot wait for rcd. The dev is very knowledgeable, when it becomes stable, or lets say beta, i will certainly use it. It will be like Solaris...
 
cracauer@ said:
pkgbase is one thing. Whether you like it or not, nobody stepped forward to maintain freebsd-update forever.

rcd is a different matter, is it gets to be pid 1. But the proposal for that makes sense to me and the improved functionality is worth the complexity (for me).
Click to expand...
The most easy thing is build kernel and base from source. Works all times. No need for additional stuff.
Same for /usr/src & /usr/ports ; i just use plain simple git clone.
 
drhowarddrfine said:
What's rcd? That new installer someone's working on for pkgbase?
Click to expand...
Beastie7

Thread 'rcd(8) - new service manager daemon'

For those who might've missed the big news on the mailing list - I decided to post it here.

Looks like the creator of pkg and poudriere (Baptiste Daroussin) has been brewing up a new modern service manager daemon for FreeBSD. From what I can tell; it's functionally similar to SMF but relies on FreeBSD features/interfaces instead of mangling the kernel.

From the original post;
Key features:

- Parallel boot via dependency DAG (no more serial rc.d execution)
- Process tracking via pdfork(2) descriptors (no PID file races)
- Subreaper via procctl(2) (no orphaned...
Click to expand...
  • Thanks
 
Alain De Vos said:
There is no OS.
- There is KERNEL
- There is BASE
- There are PACKAGES

The 3 together form the OS.

- Me i just build a few ports (20) with poudriere.
- Then for all ports (1500) i do "pkg update -f" , "pkg upgrade".

"freebsd-version -kru"
"pkg prime-origins"
Click to expand...

Respectfully, I'm going to challenge that. OS is the abstraction from hardware to well defined services that are necessary to run programs, nothing more. This misinterpretation is why I'm very nervous about the uninitiated masses pushing for bundling of the OS with applications programs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top