FreeBSD Made Progress In Q1'2017 On Linuxulator, Nearly 30k Ports

[Luke_Wolf]

It's here:

https://linux-test-project.github.io/

https://autotest.github.io/

Tut tut... That's not upstream, that's downstream as specified. Red Hat and the other companies have their own specific testing infrastructure too, but that hardly counts as upstream either.

It matters a lot when comes to development. Bigger, monolithic repo means slower development and harder bisecting. There's a significant difference between Linux and FreeBSD here:

https://git.kernel.org/

https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/

In Linux you have nearly everything nicely structured while FreeBSD is monolith. So, when comes to Linux you only check interesting tree. Be it scheduler, boot, wifi, drm, usb and so on. A real life example: how much time does it take to bisect problem with just released FreeBSD version? I found a bug in Linux 4.11-rc8. It was introduced in rc-1, but I started bisecting from rc-8. It took about 14 steps to find it = few hours of compiling.

Ps. When comes to LoC Linux 4.11 is about 18 million and FreeBSD about 32 million. You said FreeBSD includes some additional software, but it's additional bloat. Imagine Linux kernel with systemd, sendmail etc. It's the case with FreeBSD!

Except that's not bloat by any definition of the word. Nobody defines it that way, and if you do... well then by your definition systemd is bloated, because it includes udev among other software in it's repo as a matter of convenience. At the end of the day it's a DevOps problem of where to draw the lines, and while in most cases you're right that separate repos are better it's ultimately a question of if it's getting in their way and that doesn't appear to be the case, as the BSDs have all had quite a bit of time to decide otherwise, and it's worth pointing out that ReactOS, Haiku, RedoxOS, and pretty much everything NotLinux follows the same repo patterns.

[Guest]

Tut tut... That's not upstream, that's downstream as specified. Red Hat and the other companies have their own specific testing infrastructure too, but that hardly counts as upstream either.

Why do you think developers don't use test suits? They do.

Except that's not bloat by any definition of the word. Nobody defines it that way, and if you do... well then by your definition systemd is bloated, because it includes udev among other software in it's repo as a matter of convenience. At the end of the day it's a DevOps problem of where to draw the lines, and while in most cases you're right that separate repos are better it's ultimately a question of if it's getting in their way and that doesn't appear to be the case, as the BSDs have all had quite a bit of time to decide otherwise, and it's worth pointing out that ReactOS, Haiku, RedoxOS, and pretty much everything NotLinux follows the same repo patterns.

Yes, you're right on this one.

[aht0]

aht0

I missed it before. However, those responses sound like they're coming from fanboys and original article comes from the FreeBSD developer.

No it did not. Jonathan Corbet.

http://www.oreilly.com/pub/au/592

notice the

He got his first Linux system in 1993, and has never looked back. Mr. Corbet is currently the co-founder and executive editor of Linux Weekly News; he lives in Boulder, Colorado with his wife and two children.

[aht0]

It matters a lot when comes to development. Bigger, monolithic repo means slower development and harder bisecting. There's a significant difference between Linux and FreeBSD here:

You are utterly ignoring the fact that "Linux development" is really only development of it's kernel. Comparing apples and oranges.

In Linux you have nearly everything nicely structured while FreeBSD is monolith. So, when comes to Linux you only check interesting tree. Be it scheduler, boot, wifi, drm, usb and so on. A real life example: how much time does it take to bisect problem with just released FreeBSD version? I found a bug in Linux 4.11-rc8. It was introduced in rc-1, but I started bisecting from rc-8. It took about 14 steps to find it = few hours of compiling.

Linux kernel is as monolithic as FreeBSD's. Seek FOSS operating system sporting a hybrid kernel, check out DragonFly.

Ps. When comes to LoC Linux 4.11 is about 18 million and FreeBSD about 32 million. You said FreeBSD includes some additional software, but it's additional bloat. Imagine Linux kernel with systemd, sendmail etc. It's the case with FreeBSD!

Utterly naive comparison. You (or rather the article you are parroting after) are comparing ONLY kernel to a full-blown operating system. Wanna do it, let's add Linux kernel the following:
- init system
- DNS server (unbound specifically)
- NTP server
- OpenSSH server
- mandatory libraries
- documentation
- basic and more advanced Unix tools
- Linux "standard" eye-candy
- system compiler (clang - in itself a BUNCH of LoC)
- documentation
- compatibility libraries
- shells
and the list goes on.. (localization files, system headers, installers, package management utilities..). I seriously doubt you could add the stuff I I was listing around Linux kernel using less than 50 million LoC. You can see what FreeBSD "base" package contains by downloading and unpacking http://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/r...LEASE/base.txz
Have fun dissecting it.

Define "bloat" as "additions not strictly necessary for functioning of the operating system".

Eyecandy, function-duplicating tools (like dozen different utilities for setting up network), fancy GUI installers - this is strictly-speaking "bloat".

Considering that I CANNOT install minimal OpenSUSE Tumbleweed install without using up less than ~1,3-1,5 5Gb hard drive space (sorry cannot provide EXACT number since I did add some packages to it-last time I did it), where FreeBSD 11.0-RELEASE takes up exactly 528Mb of it - you should bark about "bloat" somewhere else.. in some "kitchensink" Linux mailing list perhaps. Whatever the difference in utilities installed, difference should not be in order of 3 for a functional non-X install.