tech-userlevel archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Rumpification (was Re: CVS commit: src/usr.sbin/envstat)

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 04:49:12PM +0200, Antti Kantee wrote:
> On Tue Dec 14 2010 at 09:27:10 -0500, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> > If it is, in fact, impossible, how could a system call server work?  I don't
> > know, so please, rather than mocking me, it would be helpful if you'd answer
> > the question.
> It doesn't but we/I didn't know then.  It was an experiment.

So, you had to write a large and complex piece of code to get the answer
for yourself -- and you're the person who has been doing most, if not all,
of the relevant development in the system!

Is it really so surprising to you that others do not see the necessity of
the changes you're making to the rest of the system sources, absent a
careful, detailed rationale and explanation at a higher level?

It is also not helpful when you selectively edit my text to make it
easier to argue with.  I didn't say that the particular change in
ifconfig that you mentioned "made for a better whole"; you did (I do
think David's changes _as a whole_ made ifconfig easier to understand,
though it is still quite bad).

Having rump work the way you want it to is not the only goal for NetBSD,
at least not as far as I know, and it should not automatically be the
victor in any conflict between goals (such as cleanliness or
comprehensibility of the source code).  Obviously rump offers valuable
functionality but it ought not be treated as if the principal goal of all
NetBSD development were to move functionality out of kernel space and into
user space, unless core *as a whole* chooses to make a statement to that
effect (in which case core should explain why!).

I understand that you're a member of core and therefore, in effect, can
pretty much do whatever you want to in the source tree with little or
no oversight (and I do not actually object to the effects of this most of
the time) but, honestly, you should be willing to explain and justify what
you're doing, rather than just attacking people who, on the basis of their
inferior knowledge, disagree.

Obviously I do not know some very basic things about rump.  Can you
please back up and explain, from the 10,000 foot level, what problem
you're trying to solve, how it fits into the architecture of rump as a
whole, and why the solution you've chosen is not just the best one but
(which you seem to be saying) the only one?


Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index