[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Merging Net/Free/Open-BSD together against Linux
> day OpenBSD (or NetBSD) will integrate the FreeBSD ARM port,
There is no FreeBSD ARM port.
> o distribution layout. We all nitpick. OpenBSD follows the decree in the
> BSD Net/2 README to the letter. FreeBSD, if I remember from
This is determined by hier(7).
> 2: The licensing aspect--
We're rather attached to the 2-clause modified BSD copyright. Our
claim to fame is an EASY copyright and I'm certainly not inclined to
give this up.
> o IMHO We need a solid packaging system. Someone on email@example.com touted
FreeBSD is already working on a new packaging system using paid
contractors so that it actually happens this time. We hope to have a
technology demonstrator by March of next year; I won't say too much
about it except to say that it's considerably more ambitious than any
of the existing (Linux, *BSD) packaging systems and does a better job,
IMHO, of handling both the front-end and security issues.
> o IMHO Release distributions. Base + extended utils + programming tools + X
> + kernel source + full source. Easy to use install manager. I heard
> FreeBSD is paying someone to write a really, really, really good
> installer. How easily can this be ported to other architectures. On
That's coming out of the new packaging system since, in a more ideal
world, the "installer" is just enough framework to whomp filesystems
and disklabels on new disks and then use the package system to
populate them. Everything will and should be a package, from the most
critical system component(s) to emacs.
> o Release schedules
> o At the last FreeBSD user group meeting was at, jkh admitted to
> being behind its deadlines. (This was almost a year ago.)
Actually, what I said was that we didn't seem to be making the
aggressive quarterly release schedules we'd set at the beginning of
the project and were going to something closer to a 2-3 release per
year (on a given branch) schedule. That still commits us to 4-6
releases a year and is probably more than enough work for anyone.
I don't believe in clockwork releases either except for cases of
extreme delay (like FreeBSD 3.0) where some major whip-cracking is
called for to get things unstuck. Otherwise, I prefer to release when
things look closer to being ready and make sure that things are ready
at least twice a year. The alternative is releases which are
> o Security. As a security guy and OpenBSD guy as of late we need to
> constantly audit code-- no new code can be thrown in the tree if it
> hasn't been looked at. I think Net/Free feel the same way, but I
Who's going to look at every line of code?
> We'd need a leader to lead the leaders if you get my drift. It won't be
I'd go further in saying that, for all intents and purposes, it's hard
enough to be considered essentially impossible. Perhaps if someone of
unimpeachable moral authority like Kirk McKusick were to lead, people
would follow, otherwise I can't see any credible candidates amongst
the current core superset.