# Debian Gets FreeBSD Kernel Support



## DutchDaemon (Apr 6, 2009)

Slashdot dixit:



> "Today Debian gets one step closer to really becoming 'the universal operating system' by adding two architectures based on the FreeBSD kernel to the unstable archive. This does not mean that the Debian project is ditching the Linux kernel; Debian users will be able to choose which kernel they want to install (at least on on the i386 and amd64 architectures) and get more or less the same Debian operating system they are used to. This makes Debian the first distribution, and probably the first large OS, to support two completely different kernels at the same time."


----------



## roddierod (Apr 6, 2009)

I'm really not sure if this is a good or bad thing...


----------



## graudeejs (Apr 6, 2009)

With a little luck it will become very good (and Free) advertisement of FreeBSD OS (at least kernel) :d


----------



## icer (Apr 6, 2009)

will be interesting to see performance differents


----------



## phoenix (Apr 6, 2009)

Hrm, I wonder if this would allow the use of IPFW or PF on a "Linux" system.    If so, then it's not so bad.

Especiall if they manage to enable some of the handier kernel features, like OSS support, devd support, moused support, and the nicer RC script/boot system.


----------



## Brandybuck (Apr 6, 2009)

Mad Scientist: "I've grafted the brain of a nobel prize winning surgeon into a body sewn together from ape corpses stolen from the zoo! Bwa-ha-ha!"

Seriously, while I think this is a useful exercise for Debian, I don't see any real world use for this chimera. Why replace the kernel but keep the GNU userland the same? It's useful for compatibility testing of GNU libc, or just playing around, but pointless to the end users.


----------



## Android1 (Apr 6, 2009)

Brandybuck said:
			
		

> Mad Scientist: "I've grafted the brain of a nobel prize winning surgeon into a body sewn together from ape corpses stolen from the zoo! Bwa-ha-ha!"
> 
> Seriously, while I think this is a useful exercise for Debian, I don't see any real world use for this chimera. Why replace the kernel but keep the GNU userland the same? It's useful for compatibility testing of GNU libc, or just playing around, but pointless to the end users.



One could guess that Debian GNU/kFreeBSD exists for philisophical reasons due to the fact that the GPL is a copyleft license. But, then again, why not just use the LInux kernel (or even the Hurd kernel) in that case?


----------



## roddierod (Apr 6, 2009)

I would guess in terms of FreeBSD, it could POSSIBLY lead to a better Linux emulation layer, but I guess that would call for another change to the linux base.


----------



## ctaranotte (Apr 6, 2009)

I am starting a brand new "quantum leap" project: porting FreeBSD doc to Debian


----------



## fronclynne (Apr 7, 2009)

Dunno what to say besides that I remember coming across this years ago (around the time of Debian 2.6 or something?  I don't have the disks any more, it might have been 2.2.something) while looking at fiddling around with Hurd.  As I recall it was just a sort-of "We might want to do this in the future" sort of thing.

I'm impressed.  In the same way that I would be if someone shoe-horned a 12V-71 into a 1981 RX-7.


----------



## MG (Apr 7, 2009)

Brandybuck said:
			
		

> Mad Scientist: "I've grafted the brain of a nobel prize winning surgeon into a body sewn together from ape corpses stolen from the zoo! Bwa-ha-ha!"
> 
> Seriously, while I think this is a useful exercise for Debian, I don't see any real world use for this chimera. Why replace the kernel but keep the GNU userland the same? It's useful for compatibility testing of GNU libc, or just playing around, but pointless to the end users.



Many experimental projects are pointless to end users. But with this project someone can achieve greater knowledge of operating systems and eventually fix or improve things. And besides that, there are a lot of people doing such things just for fun.
I think it's quite interesting to take a look at the core differences between FreeBSD and Linux systems.


----------



## ossnet (Apr 8, 2009)

Seems like it would be good to me just by looking at forum attendance the linux community is way bigger examp there are 86 users and 10 members on here Right now and on another linux debian based flavor there are 10241 (792 members and 9371 guest Most users ever online was 35,611


----------



## DutchDaemon (Apr 8, 2009)

Ah, the old quantity over quality chestnut.


----------



## witek (Apr 8, 2009)

Maybe they force correction of support for other filesystems like XFS, JSF, ext*, etc in freebsd kernel. Currently XFS is a comedy: how to crash your freebsd in 10 seconds? Just unmount XFS partition.


----------



## ossnet (Apr 8, 2009)

How is thounds of minds collaborating about an idea a bad thing?

Isn't the key to software development new ideas and when you have a large user base you get more input more beta tester more bug triagers and it helps everyone in the community with development of productive software solution

What's wrong with big isn't BSD the Quiet giant?


----------



## Brandybuck (Apr 8, 2009)

ossnet said:
			
		

> How is thounds of minds collaborating about an idea a bad thing?



It's not. But then again, neither is it the definition of quality. Collaboration is good, but it is possible to have too much collaboration. When you start spending more time communicating than in doing, you're losing ground. Fred Brooks' "Mythical Man Month" applies to Open Source projects just as much as it does to proprietary projects.

The vast majority of Linux developers aren't working on Linux itself, or on GNU, but on a specific distro. FreeBSD actually has more developers than some popular Linux distributions! Then when you get to the users, only a tiny fraction of them will bother filing bugs, and nearly all of them will be filed against the distro and not the kernel or userland. Many of those bugs never get past the distro. Finally, few Linux distros are community oriented, so they have fewer stakeholders. Why contribute to a commercial project for free?

Quantity is not quality, not even in the world of Open Source.


----------



## sossego (Apr 8, 2009)

Ye olde threade kyller approacheth....


It's a good idea if you can  get both types of security policies to work together.


----------

