Since, I am an ex(1) troglodyte, I'll be happy to umpire. (I know ed(1) is the standard editor, but I'm willing to trade a little standardosity for more convenience.) On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 10:06 PM Will Senn wrote: > No worries. Maybe it’s time for a vi emacs discussion... totally kidding :) > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Jan 30, 2021, at 9:00 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > > > > I think this has gone on along enough. Don't want it to be personal, not > > my intent. > > > > Like I said it seems like a Linux vs FreeBSD thing. Don't want that. > > You can search the archives about Ted talking about how ext was not > > all that (I'm a fan). > > > >> On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 08:52:09PM -0600, Will Senn wrote: > >> Ha. Zfs may not be the be all and end all, but like I said, it???s > never failed me. Whereas extX and btrfs, and, and, and have many times. > Please don???t denigrate my knowledge, as so far as I know, we???ve never > met, and nothing I said warrants such. The installer reminds me of > Redhat???s old anaconda installer, I???ll grant you it???s dated. However, > I typically install a new linux distro every week and there are many, many > installers that are far more confusing - Open Suse and Fedora are two that > come to mind, Debian as well. I would hazard to guess your favorite Linux > is based on a distro that lacks a decent installer (Ubuntu and Mint are > Debian based). > >> > >> Will > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >>> On Jan 30, 2021, at 8:25 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > >>> > >>> If you like ZFS you don't understand operating systems design. I do. > >>> Jeff Bonwick was a stats student at Stanford when he took my OS class, > >>> I convinced him to come to Sun. Bill Moore worked for me. That's the > two > >>> main ZFS guys and I thought I had taught them well but they let me > down. > >>> > >>> ZFS doesn't use the page cache, they said it was too hard because ZFS > >>> is compressed. A typical file system just has block numbers, a > compressed > >>> one needs another int per block, it's the int that says these many > bytes > >>> are a block uncompressed. It's not that hard, it is 2 ints instead of > 1. > >>> > >>> In case I'm not being clear, the page cache is what everyone else uses > >>> but ZFS has its own cache. So if you want to mmap() a ZFS file, ZFS > >>> has to bcopy() the data into the page cache and then spend a shit ton > >>> of code to make sure that the page cache data is in sync with the ZFS > >>> cache data. > >>> > >>> SunOS came from BSD but SunOS added mmap. Which had the same problem, > >>> the BSD buffer cache was exactly the same as the ZFS cache, Sun spent > >>> years of effort to get rid of the buffer cache, everything is in the > >>> page cache. So ZFS was a HUGE step backwards in systems design. Might > >>> be the best file system ever (it is not) but it was not a good player > >>> in the OS world. > >>> > >>> Those guys said that it was too hard to make a compressed file fit in > >>> the page cache. BitKeeper has that code and proves that it can be > done. > >>> Be happy to walk anyone who cares through that code, I didn't write > that, > >>> Wayne Scott did, but it's some of the best written code I've ever seen. > >>> Up there with Mojo's work on the SunOS VM system. (I'll bet that noone > >>> takes me up on this offer, people love to argue but most don't want to > >>> learn. Prove me wrong, please). > >>> > >>> So good on you that you like ZFS and FreeBSD. I don't and I don't for > >>> really good reasons. > >>> > >>> Let's try it this way. Get back to me when you can show me 40 people > >>> who have installed FreeBSD on their own, with no help. In the same > >>> time, I can show you 40,000 people who have installed Linux on their > >>> own, with no help. Probably 400,000. > >>> > >>> Technology is great, ease of use is what gets you users. ZFS is > >>> great but doesn't play nice with the OS. > >>> > >>> That's my oh brother. > >>> > >>>> On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 07:47:41PM -0600, Will Senn wrote: > >>>> Oh brother. I use FreeBSD all the time. I prefer it for its stability > and ZFS which has NEVER let me down and I???ve done my share of stupid user > error. Now that Linux has ZFS, it doesn???t seem as stuck in the dark ages, > but uptime on my fbsd instance is 10x any of my Linux instances. We are > soooo off topic, I think :). But, I???m always up for talking up FBSD. I > use it in my classes, too and the system is much more coherent for my > systems programming classes than linux. > >>>> > >>>> Will > >>>> > >>>> Sent from my iPhone > >>>> > >>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2021, at 5:11 PM, Greg 'groggy' Lehey > wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Saturday, 30 January 2021 at 14:28:54 -0800, Larry McVoy wrote: > >>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 04:28:26PM -0500, Clem Cole wrote: > >>>>>>> If I could get the day-2-day > >>>>>>> applications that I need to work on FreeBSD, I suspect I would be > there in > >>>>>>> a heartbeat. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I dunno about that. I tried out FreeBSD a couple of years ago when > >>>>>> Netflix was flirting with me. The installer hasn't seen any loving > in > >>>>>> 30 years it would seem. The disk setup tool sucks just as bad as it > >>>>>> did back in 1988. > >>>>> > >>>>> You could be right there, for some value of 1988 (FreeBSD came into > >>>>> being in 1992). The tools work without being good. But how often do > >>>>> you use them? I've been using FreeBSD since the beginning, and I > >>>>> can't recall when I last used the disk partitioning tool, though I'm > >>>>> sure that when I did I overrode a lot of (all?) the suggestions. > >>>>> > >>>>>> I remember when Linux was this bad in the .90ish releases. A long > >>>>>> time ago. Now their install is painless, it's every bit as good as > >>>>>> Windows and maybe better. > >>>>> > >>>>> FWIW, I find Microsoft "Windows" installation terminally confusing > >>>>> (that's what you were talking about, right?). And I've run into > >>>>> serious problems with various Linux installations too. That doesn't > >>>>> make the FreeBSD tools better, but maybe it relativizes it. > >>>>> > >>>>>> And it got that way fast, I remember doing an install on some > >>>>>> machine around 1998 or 1999, I didn't have a mouse plugged in, no > >>>>>> worries, you could just move around with the keyboard. X11 came up > >>>>>> as part of the install, the entire install was graphical and > >>>>>> seamless. > >>>>> > >>>>> The FreeBSD installer *does* install X if you select it. > >>>>> > >>>>>> FreeBSD is stuck in the 1990's in terms of user interface. > >>>>> > >>>>> You're still talking about the installer, aren't you? The normal > user > >>>>> interface is via the shell, which hasn't changed, and for a good > >>>>> reason. > >>>>> > >>>>>> They've done some good stuff in the kernel but it's not an end user > >>>>>> system, > >>>>> > >>>>> There I have to agree with you. A little TLC would go a long way. > >>>>> But I hope that you're not advocating the "change your GUI with your > >>>>> underwear" attitude that Microsoft, Apple and many Linux distros > >>>>> have. One of the reasons I don't use Linux is because every time I > >>>>> try, the interface has changed. > >>>>> > >>>>> Greg > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Sent from my desktop computer. > >>>>> Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key. > >>>>> See complete headers for address and phone numbers. > >>>>> This message is digitally signed. If your Microsoft mail program > >>>>> reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA > >>> > >>> -- > >>> --- > >>> Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com > http://www.mcvoy.com/lm > > > > -- > > --- > > Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com > http://www.mcvoy.com/lm >