91–100 of 110 posts
Is FreeBSD still used to as great of an extent in US Government / Military / Intelligence as it used to be? There seemed to be some talk of Linux I noticed in past years, and I’ve been thinking about trying to out again, but I’d feel better if I knew that it was still well-used.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I cannot help being a bit sad that contribution like this will only benefit the few people that use FreeBSD Same could be said the other way around, the thing is Linux can implement it and even take the code, the other way is rather difficult....so much for freedom. And not sure what you mean with "few" people, the few Playstation 3/4/5 users? Juniper? OpnSense/Pfsense installations? Or the few Truenas/Freenas users…
I still expect the number to be pretty small compared to the number of Linux users, no matter how you define user (if playstation users counts as freebsd users, then I guess nearly everyone is a Linux user :) ) The point of the licence is a good point. Is the kind of code drewg123 is referring to regularly copied from BSD to Linux? (i understand it should be possible in this direction?). Thanks for the video, looks l…
However, publicizing the ideas and the results is valuable to other operating systems even without the code. If you're building something on Linux (or Windows? or ?) that could benefit from kTLS (including NIC accelerated kTLS), knowing it can work and having a roadmap is great. You would still need to do the plumbing, but you could skip a lot of the design. Being able to look at the code is nice too.
And, if you're willing to try FreeBSD + nginx, you could jump directly to that. If you're deploying something with similar performance characteristics to a CDN box, it's probably a very narrow application, and doesn't need to run on the same stack as the rest of your fleet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The biggest feature for me was zstd compression
How is it compared the lz or whatever the fast one was? Or is lz?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is a good talk That is not a good talk unless you already advocate for abandoning standards, and celebrate Linux's growing power to dictate how the shrinking number of remaining OSes design things. You might easily miss it if you're already onboard with systemd, but in his point by point address of systemd's shortcomings - he repeatedly handwaves and redirects. Systemd is a mess, which is an amazing accomplish…
Sys V init was not a standard. Is it in POSIX? I can't find it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is a good talk That is not a good talk unless you already advocate for abandoning standards, and celebrate Linux's growing power to dictate how the shrinking number of remaining OSes design things. You might easily miss it if you're already onboard with systemd, but in his point by point address of systemd's shortcomings - he repeatedly handwaves and redirects. Systemd is a mess, which is an amazing accomplish…
Standards can become outdated you know? And by the way standards aren't really the word of some kind of god that you should follow blindly and never question. Many standards are ratified just to settle the status quo regarding various solutions to a common problem. At this point, one might even argue that the next "standard" for init systems should just be based off systemd.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sys V init was not a standard. Is it in POSIX? I can't find it.
One of these init systems is run by a guy that is openly hostile to POSIX, the other can be found on several different operating systems and has been around forever. hmmm...
Yes, I’m for abandoning pointless standards. There are concrete benefits to systemd - faster boot, comprehensive service management, power savings, memory savings, a consistent interface to changing system state. What is the benefit to sticking with an rc script architecture designed to run a handful of processes on a pdp?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not so much on servers, but boot time is important on desktop, where most users will power it in only during the day.
Desktops can sleep as well. Boot time is important for embedded computers, e.g. in-vehicle systems, but otherwise I don't see why would this be such an issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of these init systems is run by a guy that is openly hostile to POSIX, the other can be found on several different operating systems and has been around forever. hmmm...
Honestly, what do we need POSIX for in 2020? As discussed in the talk, it traces to the age of the Unix wars, when there was a panoply of processors and Unix variants. POSIX is great if you’re concerned with recompiling some C so it works on SPARC and Alpha and POWER, on Solaris, Tru64, and AIX. That world is gone . Yes, I’m for abandoning pointless standards. There are concrete benefits to systemd - faster boot, com…
You've never written portable software, have you? You can't write portable software without a common interface. Have you ever looked at what autotools vomits out? You'll see shell scripts containing the likes of "echo $1 | sed 's/^x//'" in order to just get things to where they have a chance of sharing enough commonality to compile. Imagine how much worse it would be without POSIX. Nothing would run on anything that the developers didn't account for, this includes OS (plus version), environment, and hardware architecture. That is the world you are asking for, not the one we presently live in.
> What is the benefit to sticking with an rc script architecture designed to run a handful of processes on a pdp?
Freedom, for not only the end user but all the way up to distro packager. Systemd is designed to be non-portable, and force a network-effect pressure. I was similarly suspicious about WSL designing toward a linux API instead of POSIX... an effort to reduce the potential for alternatives emerging in the future, where your choices are windows or linux.