Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 24th Oct 2005 10:09 UTC, submitted by FreeBSD_User
FreeBSD Rink Springer would like to see his Xbox port migrated into FreeBSD-current. He is looking to import his FreeBSD/Xbox within the FreeBSD/i386 port, bringing support into FreeBSD-CURRENT. He is proposing a prioritized plan in order to accomplish this goal and is looking for your comments and feedback.
Order by: Score:
Something for NetBSD, maybe?
by Anonymous on Mon 24th Oct 2005 10:56 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

This seems to be something better left for the NetBSD project.

Reply Score: 1

v RE: Something for NetBSD, maybe?
by Anonymous on Mon 24th Oct 2005 11:38 UTC in reply to "Something for NetBSD, maybe?"
Absolutely not.
by justin on Mon 24th Oct 2005 12:02 UTC
justin
Member since:
2005-07-12

I have never seen the point of porting an OS to a video game device such as the XBox.

Are there datacenters out there full of XBoxes? I think not.

While I applaud the effort and contributions to the project, porting FreeBSD to the XBox is trivial in that there's no use for it, beyond the nostalgia of annoying Microsoft.

I doubt this makes it to the i386 port.

- Justin

Reply Score: 2

RE: Absolutely not.
by Anonymous on Mon 24th Oct 2005 16:28 UTC in reply to "Absolutely not."
Anonymous Member since:
---

"Are there datacenters out there full of XBoxes? I think not."

Actually there are datacenters that have Xboxes, Playstations et al (not filled). I think an entire rack could be filled with all the units.

FYI: I work at a Tier 1 ISP. I won't give you the name; but its on this list:

http://scoreboard.keynote.com/scoreboard/Main.aspx?Login=Y&Username...

Ahhh... another hard day at the office.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Absolutely not.
by Anonymous on Mon 24th Oct 2005 12:08 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Is BSD only used in Datacenters? Don't think so.
The XBox is a cheap computer, and as a such it's useful.

If there is going be an easy way to install an usable OS on the XBox360, then I'll buy one. The same is true for the Playstation, so it doesn't matter if it's Micros~1 or not.

Reply Score: 1

yes, it's useful
by molnarcs on Mon 24th Oct 2005 13:31 UTC
molnarcs
Member since:
2005-09-10

I think some of you overlook the usefullness of this port.

1) supporting multiple archs keeps the codebase portable and clean
2) you forget about PC-BSD and DesktopBSD - both would benefit from FreeBSD supporting the Xbox. They are also unique unix desktop solutions - PC-BSD for it's tight integration with KDE/QT and its user-friendly package management, and Desktop-BSD for providing an easy to use GUI for the classical FreeBSD tools like ports. In this respect, they aim at slightly different users: those seeking an alternative OS where installing packages works like in windows/OsX, without wanting to dig too deep into FreeBSD, and those who wish to learn unix but are put off by the seemingly difficult installation project. So yes, making FreeBSD work on the Xbox is cool and useful!

Reply Score: 3

Re: yes, it's useful
by Anonymous on Mon 24th Oct 2005 13:44 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

1) xbox has a 733Mhz Intel processor inside it - it is not strictly speaking a new architecture, and there are already *useful* architectures being supported;

2) PC-BSD and DesktopBSD could add the necessary patches to their own source if they really want to support xbox, without cluttering up FreeBSD's source with support for a piece of hardware that is already obsolete.

So no, making FreeBSD work on xbox is neither cool nor useful.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Re: yes, it's useful
by molnarcs on Mon 24th Oct 2005 14:02 UTC in reply to "Re: yes, it's useful"
molnarcs Member since:
2005-09-10

RE:1 how many? besides, it is his call. He would like to do it in his own free time, so... (and no, you can't tell a developer what he or she should do instead of what he likes to do).

RE:2 " PC-BSD and DesktopBSD could add the necessary patches to their own source" why should they? if someone is willing to do it in the mainline "distro." "cluttering up FreeBSD's source yeah, sure, porting an OS to different hardwares "clutters" up the source code. You better tell NetBSD devs how cluttered their source must be by now ;) ))

So what's your point? A developer wants to add xbox support to FreeBSD woring in his own free time on it - and you come here blathering about clutter, and wasting time? If it is useful to him, why does it bother you? And at the very least, we can say that it will be useful for a few dozen users, who will have another choice for the xbox besides linux (and a very nice choice).

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Re: yes, it's useful
by Joao on Mon 24th Oct 2005 14:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Re: yes, it's useful"
Joao Member since:
2005-07-26

Maybe for you FreeBSD is an OS to toy around with, but for some of us it runs mission critical applications for corporate environments.
With this in mind you would not like the idea that extra code for (for my purposes) useless xbox might instabilize the entire thing. Every line of code is a potential bug.
The time spent on porting is not the time-waste i'm worried about. its time thats wasted during bug-hunts and such things which are the cullprit here.
It doesn't stop with just merging the code. You need support for it and what not. Those resources could IMO be better spent. And lets be honest. FreeBSD's stability has not made much fame since the introduction of 5.x

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Re: yes, it's useful
by Haicube on Mon 24th Oct 2005 16:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Re: yes, it's useful"
Haicube Member since:
2005-08-06

I agree to some extent but with a few exceptions.

Porting to Xbox means supporting one HW (as the HW is identical in each box). The HW (if not aiming for 360) is x86 right? So no difference here either...

And otherwise it's a question about someone adding something into the kernel/Xbox tree which really don't affect things at all if not compiled with the right flags right?

On the other, I do get your point with every line is critical and focus of the project etc. Still, I don't think this will affect those critical lines very much...

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Re: yes, it's useful
by molnarcs on Tue 25th Oct 2005 08:35 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Re: yes, it's useful"
molnarcs Member since:
2005-09-10

Maybe for you FreeBSD is an OS to toy around with, but for some of us it runs mission critical applications for corporate environments.

Oh please, drop the "I'm teh serious user" routine. Using "mission critical" in "corporate environment" to sound more convincing is like Ballmer using "innovation" all the time.

With this in mind you would not like the idea that extra code for (for my purposes) useless xbox might instabilize the entire thing.

This is just plain silly. Do you use pc98 boxes in your mission critical corporate environment? ;) If not, why don't you demand removing support for it, since it is useless for your purposes... What about alpha or sparc? I can't believe that I'm arguing with you on this btw... When did FreeBSD's support for one arch or another slow down a release process? (hint - the kld support on ultrasparcs is on the todo list since I've been using FreeBSD) Or by the same logic, why not strip out bktr support? It means more lines, more bug possibilities, and it is obviously not useful in your corporate environment ;)

Those resources could IMO be better spent.
Please, tell the guy to stop working on something he wants and likes to do - and work on things you deem useful.

My point is: the issue is blown out of proportions. Like others said - it won't affect the stability of your system (and bugs on xbox won't slow down releases, just like missing kld support with ultrasparcs didnt'). How many of the showstopper defects could be (taken the 6.x release cycle) traced back to supporting various archs? (I'm not talking about x86-64, which is obviously a very important platform). None. If anything, adding support for different archs (although the xbox is not that different) may expose bugs that would be difficult to find otherwise.

Ciao.

[Now I'll go back to toying while leaving you to your mission critical work in your corporate environment ;) )))]

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Re: yes, it's useful
by Anonymous on Mon 24th Oct 2005 16:31 UTC in reply to "Re: yes, it's useful"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Perhaps not in regards to the processor. What about the chipset (North bridge/South bridge)?

Reply Score: 0

RE: Re: yes, it's useful
by Lazarus on Wed 26th Oct 2005 03:05 UTC in reply to "Re: yes, it's useful"
Lazarus Member since:
2005-08-10

"xbox has a 733Mhz Intel processor inside it - it is not strictly speaking a new architecture, and there are already *useful* architectures being supported"

The amount of code in the port is not substantial. It's really inconsequential compared to the size of the rest of the source.

"PC-BSD and DesktopBSD could add the necessary patches to their own source if they really want to support xbox, without cluttering up FreeBSD's source with support for a piece of hardware that is already obsolete."

Sources for various archs are in their own directories, so integrating this port would hardly clutter up FreeBSD's source tree. This concept hasn't fallen under the term "computer science" in my lifetime (and I'm old enough to have creaky joints ;^), and it's laughable that you see it as a problem.

"So no, making FreeBSD work on xbox is neither cool nor useful."

Not for you, but obviously it is to somebody, or else it wouldn't have been done. Don't believe what telescopes tell you. You're not the center of the Universe, and your opinion on any given matter means nothing as you're not doing the work.

Sitting back and complaining is not a meaningful contribution.

Reply Score: 2

6.0 first
by Anonymous on Mon 24th Oct 2005 14:18 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Let them release 6.0 first. We can talk about 7.0 later. We have been waiting for 6.0 for a loooooooooong time now.

Reply Score: 0

Benefits?
by Marcellus on Tue 25th Oct 2005 04:24 UTC
Marcellus
Member since:
2005-08-26

Are there any benefits to generic x86 computers that won't be there unless this xbox thing is imported?
If there are, is there any reason why these things can't be imported "standalone" instead?

Personally I think xbox support in FreeBSD is a waste of resources.

Reply Score: 1