Practical File System Design with the Be File System (1999) [pdf]

Re:Practical File System Design with the Be File System (199... by yebyen on Friday April 24, 2015 @11:22AM (#9433945)

The stated goal of R1 Final has always been complete binary compatibility with BeOS R5, but seriously that was years ago. Package management is far from "a linux-ism" -- you are hard pressed to find a modern operating system that does not have any infrastructural support for taking candy from upstream.

Proprietary OS is going to push the app store, by converse the free OS is still going to scale well because the skeleton crew of volunteers can still keep all the supported binary software up to date with security and modernization updates (not necessarily related to Haiku) for the masses who will not compile it for themselves.

You may have some insight that I do not regarding project leadership but I respectfully disagree that package management is not just "lost in the weeds." Haiku would not be advancing or at all survivable as a general-purpose OS without it.

HaikuPorts/HaikuDepot/pkgman is really slick.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Practical File System Design with the Be File System (199... by teacup50 on Friday April 24, 2015 @12:17PM (#9434300)

Package management is what you need when you have a huge tree of unstable dependencies that have to be updated in lock-step.

Proprietary OS don't have that, which is why:

1) They can support stable binary-only commercial software, and

2) They do not need or benefit from Linux-style package management.

BeOS R5 had the stable APIs necessary to achieve a stable OS without Linux style package management. The shift away from that has also involved a shift away from the idea that the OS should ship ABI-stable libraries.

Linux-style package management isn't an appropriate tier-one feature for a modern stable desktop OS.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Practical File System Design with the Be File System (199... by wcummings on Friday April 24, 2015 @12:41PM (#9434430)

Even if users don't need "Linux-style" package management, developers definitely do.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Practical File System Design with the Be File System (199... by teacup50 on Friday April 24, 2015 @03:08PM (#9435423)

Only for "Linux-style" software, and it need not be built into the base system.

In fact, it should not -- if having a stable system on which binary software can be shipped is important, a built-in supported Linux-style dependency management system will undermine that goal entirely.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Practical File System Design with the Be File System (199... by yebyen on Friday April 24, 2015 @07:22PM (#9436501)

I don't get "linux-style." It's not linux-style, it's "built-on-free-software" style. The other style is "I paid someone to do it" style. That's not really a style, it's just polar opposites.

[ Parent | on HN ]