Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BSD outcast tries/fails to Port Hammerfs to OpenBSD

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BSD outcast tries/fails to Port Hammerfs to OpenBSD

    Sign! Sad world indeed.

    Over here is an example of some BSD zealot wasting his time on something that no one will use.

    This person's name is Brad Arrington, a former member of the OpenBSD project who was presumably kicked out due to infighting. He is now trying to port DragonflyBSD's hammerfs2 to OpenBSD possibly to create his own BSD distribution. Not only will this not be useful to anyone but there will be no support from either DragonflyBSD or OpenBSD due to conflicting politics, purism and BSD dogma.

    The fact that it's hammerfs just makes it sadder (worst then contributing nothing). HammerFS was claimed by Mathew Dillon as an answer to ZFS thus promoting it as one of the new generation file systems including BTRFS, RieserFS and (future Microsoft failure) ReFS. But this is can't be further from the true as HammerFS still lacks compared to ZFS and to a getter extent, BTRFS. As a matter of fact, as of 2014 BTRFS is the only one in this FS generation to be full production ready. ZFS is production ready of Solaris which has been deservingly acquired by Oracle and Linux. Contrary to BSD folklore ZFS is not Production ready on any of the BSDs. Hammerfs is even less production ready. If one looks at the details more closely, Hammerfs is nothing more then UFS2 on steroids but worse.

    Another problem is the operating system OpenBSD. it's kernel is simply incapable of handling even a file system which partially fits into BTRFS's generation of file systems. Much less a file system which truly fits into that generation. This can be seen in Brad Arrington's github page where he has successfully compiled OpenBSD binaries of the tools for hammerfs but fails to mount any HammerFS partition successfully. This is due solely to the inadequacy of the OpenBSD kernel. Sacifices will have to be made as the parts of DragonflyBSD's kernel which allow successful mounting/accessing of a Hammer partition are GPL licensed.

    FreeBSD barely handles ZFS with significant performance penalties while NetBSD has failed outright for 5 years in their ZFS implementation. The only OS that handles ZFS with negligible penalties is Linux. Not even Solaris (which ZFS was designed for) could achieve such a thing.

  • #2
    Man. OpenBSD really needs to be pull out if it's misery. Because this bullshit project's just getting ridiculous.

    By the way, OpenBSD 5.6 was just released. I looked at want's changed and really almost nothing's changed. They shouldn't even have bothered to make a release of they have nothing new.

    Comment


    • #3
      This HammerFS sounds pretty good. Though, as you already said we probably don't need it on Linux. Still, I can see why this guy wants to port it to the BSD that he's used too. Though, it's pretty weird how the BSDs' kernels are so incompatible, while there are only two main incompatible Linux kernels that I know of (mainline and Android). Well, this port has been picking up steam since the end of October, so you should probably give him some time. It is a low level project.

      Also, your knowledge of what goes on in the BSD world is highly impressive! Do you mind sharing the sites you use? Do you frequently read the mailing lists for different BSD OSes? Or do you just follow important BSD developers on Github or something?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by jake_lesser View Post
        By the way, OpenBSD 5.6 was just released. I looked at want's changed and really almost nothing's changed. They shouldn't even have bothered to make a release of they have nothing new.
        Thanks for the notification, I've looked at some of it and frankly, all I just see is insults, changes will are either mediocre or made by one who could only be insane.

        LibreSSL: No support for FIPS-140 compliance.
        An example of childish insults.

        LibreSSL: No support for *
        I have a feeling LibreSSL wouldn't be used very much. Probably only within OpenBSD just like OpenSMTPD and OpenNTPD. OpenSSH was a special case, it has backed by corperations would based their proprietary code of it. LSH is way better then OpenSSH.

        New brswphy(4) driver for Broadcom BCM53xx 10/100/1000TX Ethernet PHYs
        ...
        The bwi(4) driver now works in systems with more than 1GB of RAM.
        What an irony, they take effort to port rarely used broadcom drivers and make mediocre improvements to bwi but they can't event port the more popular BCM4313 and make it work. There is already an ISC licensed brcm80211 Linux driver that is open to them and they just ignore. Just goes to show how apathetic BSD is to reality.

        Generic network stack improvements:
        Network performance in OpenBSD has always been terrible. I don't think such "improvements" are going to help much.

        Allow autoinstall(8) to fetch and install sets from multiple locations.
        Of course make it easier to download from NSA based locations were the sets have NSA backdoors.

        Installer improvements:
        Still the same outdated user unfriendly text-only installer. Yawn.

        traceroute6(8) has been merged into traceroute(8).
        Now network management on OpenBSD is going to be a lot harder.

        New httpd(8) HTTP server with FastCGI and SSL support.
        Ah yes. Reyk Floater's new HTTP server which is only just a stripped version of his relayd crap. Much Ado about nothing.

        OpenSMTPD 5.4.3
        Seriously, does anyone use OpenSMTPD seriously?

        And much much more crap...
        Not even going to bother.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by CTown View Post
          Also, your knowledge of what goes on in the BSD world is highly impressive! Do you mind sharing the sites you use? Do you frequently read the mailing lists for different BSD OSes? Or do you just follow important BSD developers on Github or something?
          I regularly check the mailing list and src repo of a variety of FLOSS projects, Linux, GNU, BSD etc. and so I have learned what is good and what is bad.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by jake_lesser View Post
            Man. OpenBSD really needs to be pull out if it's misery. Because this bullshit project's just getting ridiculous.

            By the way, OpenBSD 5.6 was just released. I looked at want's changed and really almost nothing's changed. They shouldn't even have bothered to make a release of they have nothing new.
            Meanwhile, OpenBSD has OpenBGPd (supporting MP-BGP), OpenOSPFd, and LDPd; out-of the box MPLS networking, since 2008, which Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD have utterly failed to implement.

            Comment


            • #7
              Some people really shouln't be allowed on the internet.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ningo View Post
                Some people really shouln't be allowed on the internet.
                The guy clearly has no life and just goes around trolling. Too many mentally deranged whack jobs visit and post on this site.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Good to know that there is a 9front OS out there.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X