Linked by Oliver on Fri 11th Mar 2011 23:32 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source "Now that Linux is the most popular free Unix-like operating system, it shouldn't be a surprise that some projects have begun treating non-Linux operating systems as second-class citizens. This isn't out of contempt for the BSDs or OpenSolaris, it's just a matter of limited manpower: if almost all the users of the application have a Linux operating system and if all the core developers are using Linux themselves, it's difficult to keep supporting other operating systems. But sometimes the choice to leave out support for other operating systems is explicitly made, e.g. when the developers want to implement some innovative features that require functionality that is (at least for now) only available in the Linux kernel."
Thread beginning with comment 465899
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
pfgbsd
Member since:
2011-03-12


systemd is based of apple launchd design and expanded on to take advantage of the features Linux kernel offers. Now why is not BSD doing the same.


The BSDs have had launchd for a while .. in the ports tree. It may just be that for most purposes the traditional BSD system just works OK, and it's not difficult to install something different (like launchd) for those that need it.


BSD developers have sat in one place too long that is the problem. Does the BSD service system offer fast startup? Nop. Has linux developers been searching for faster ways to start the system yes.


FreeBSD has softupdates: some Linux developers were interested but none had the skills to do it. What's wrong about having different interests?


Simple fact waiting for innovation to settle. Is to wait be left in a stuffed up position and become hard to remain compatible. Linux is currently the dominate market share. BSD have to accept this.


The BSDs will not disappear because linux evolves faster into the unknown. some developers actually *like* stable APIs. The linux community has to accept this.

Reply Parent Score: 2

danieldk Member since:
2005-11-18

Soft updates are kludgy and complex. For this reason, soft updates will be removed in NetBSD 6.0:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.netbsd.announce/399

Instead, NetBSD will provide FFS with journaling, very much like ext3.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Oliver Member since:
2006-07-15

Well, FUD isn't the answer. Softupdates aren't that complex and it's easy to get them checked with background fsck. In FBSD 9 there are even journaling softupdates, the best of both worlds.

But then, do you really consider those ext-hacks an alternative? Once in a while they have to be fcked due steady inconsistencies. This I call progress ... it's a hack as I said. And if FUD is really your base, just use gjournal in FreeBSD.

Reply Parent Score: 2

phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Soft updates are kludgy and complex. For this reason, soft updates will be removed in NetBSD 6.0:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.netbsd.announce/399

Instead, NetBSD will provide FFS with journaling, very much like ext3.


Hrm, just because NetBSD devs can't figure out how to make SU work correctly, doesn't make it a kludge. ;) ;)

Afterall, the FreeBSD devs have added journalling to the SoftUpdates code without affecting compatibility with UFS2. Thus, you can now mount a UFS2 filesystem without SU, with SU, or with SU+J.

For those who don't want to muddle around with SU+J, there's always GEOM Journal that adds journalling to any block device (aka, journalling for every filesystem).

Reply Parent Score: 2