Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 69

Thread: Apple's OS X Launchd Being Ported To FreeBSD

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,424

    Default Apple's OS X Launchd Being Ported To FreeBSD

    Phoronix: Apple's OS X Launchd Being Ported To FreeBSD

    There is new work within the FreeBSD camp to port Apple's launchd from OS X to non-Darwin systems...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU0NjQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,932

    Default

    Wonder if they'll port to OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonFly BSD too?
    Perhaps even Linux?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    674

    Default

    Isn't launchd like systemD? If so, why not port the latter since Gnome and probably soon other software will depend on systemD?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    Isn't launchd like systemD? If so, why not port the latter since Gnome and probably soon other software will depend on systemD?
    Because systemd is at the moment (and probably will ever be) Linux-only and is also licensed GPL (LGPL v2.1). "launchd" on the other hand is taylored for a BSD-style system (OS X) and is "Apache License" licensed. The latter is much more preferable for FreeBSD. Remember FreeBSD ditched GCC in favour of LLVM mainly because of the license.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glasen View Post
    Because systemd is at the moment (and probably will ever be) Linux-only and is also licensed GPL (LGPL v2.1). "launchd" on the other hand is taylored for a BSD-style system (OS X) and is "Apache License" licensed. The latter is much more preferable for FreeBSD. Remember FreeBSD ditched GCC in favour of LLVM mainly because of the license.
    It was about control, license restrictions and design goals.

    The world is better off with LLVM/Clang in it. It's what has gotten GCC to evolve.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    It was about control, license restrictions and design goals.

    The world is better off with LLVM/Clang in it. It's what has gotten GCC to evolve.
    Yeah, pretty much. BSD-license has no control, is legally incompetent license (hence most switched to Apache), no restrictions (do what you want, close all you want), BSD init had the only design goal of being KISS for the sake of KISS which leads to poorly integrated system, lack of advanced functionality.

    On the other side the only misarchitecture of GNU was monolithic design because they feared emerging of proprietary plugins (which do happen) but on the other side it lead to piles of old hard to manage code. Still, LLVM is exact opposite, there are proprietary extensions available. I guess GNU couldn't care less. This is exact same thing with Gstreamer, with the topmost contributor being codec-selling/licensing/pro-patenting company. This is why you prefer VLC.

    Otherwise, GNU has powered BSD since forever and doesn't care what proprietary company those guys are powering next (like Blizzard, Netflix). GNU is also a political movement, that is protecting free software, where BSD is politically an anarchy being a tool for everything.

    That said, I hardly imagine why a tool needs launchd. Maybe because they have low resources, and Apple is kind enough to allow them that. Apple still holds all the rights, but they already use LLVM, CUPS, they prefer Apple to GNU, they couldn't care more.

    So, where is this shitornado about how launchd is incompatible with legacy and how non-KISS it is; like what pro-BSD trolls created about systemd?
    Last edited by brosis; 12-18-2013 at 12:14 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    649

    Default

    AFIK systemD was developed because launchd couldn't coexist with legacy sysV init (and they didn't like Upstart), so porting it to FreeBSD could turn out to be a major task.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    616

    Default

    Good since FreeBSDs current init system sucks monkey balls. It's the most slow thing I have ever used in my life. You totally forget that you have a SATA 3 SSD installed. My Arch Linux installation is able to boot faster than FreeBSDs init is able to set the hostname. I'm not kidding.

    It's systemd btw not Sytemd or SystemD or systemD.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    71

    Default

    Could this be the break Debian needs in relation to their init system conundrum with kFreeBSD as a Debian variant?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackout23 View Post
    Good since FreeBSDs current init system sucks monkey balls. It's the most slow thing I have ever used in my life. You totally forget that you have a SATA 3 SSD installed. My Arch Linux installation is able to boot faster than FreeBSDs init is able to set the hostname. I'm not kidding.

    It's systemd btw not Sytemd or SystemD or systemD.
    I think this plays into the aura of BS that surrounds the FreeBSD community. They constantly claim that their OS is "faster" than Linux, while the benchmarks claim otherwise. Even without systemd, sysv easily beats the pants off bsdinit. A recent interview with Marshall Mckusick shows just ignorant their leaders are. He claimed that "Windows teaches you to tolerate BSODs three time a week, so one time a week is welcome news". This is absolute horses***. I've been using Windows in home and office for a decade, on many machines, and I barely get one BSOD a year. The last time I got a BSOD that was not hardware related was three years ago for a GPU driver update.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •