| 1 |
* Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > True. But FreeBSD isn't that popular like Windows, Mac or Linux. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> So you don't work at a Tier 1 ISP then? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> FreeBSD rules that space. I get hugely better performance out of Postfix on |
| 8 |
> FreeBSD than on Linux - all other ISPs in this country concur. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Well, not everybody is a tier-1 isp ... ;-o |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
BTW: one of my customers, a really big one here in Germany |
| 13 |
(who also has several of the major free mail portals) runs |
| 14 |
its mail systems on GNU/Linux (well, inhouse mailing is done |
| 15 |
via Exchange+ADS, surprisingly it actually works ;-)). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
But I'd really like to know what produces the performance hits |
| 18 |
on Posfix @ Linux. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> In fact, portage is complete overkill and I refuse to allow it |
| 21 |
> to be deployed at work. Check my posting history for the |
| 22 |
> rationale behind this. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Well, portage could be much thinner if certain things would be |
| 25 |
moved explicitly out-of-scope or solved more generic on a |
| 26 |
different layer. (yes, I'm explicitly ignoring the historical |
| 27 |
issues right now ;-p). |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
For example: |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
* distro-specific and various source retrieval methods would not |
| 32 |
be necessary, if the packaging/distro-build system would simply |
| 33 |
fetch it's sources from an vcs (eg. git ;-p) using canonical |
| 34 |
versioning/namespace scheme [1]. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
* instead of useflags (the terminology implies we're switching |
| 37 |
things some package *uses*, not provides), model the available |
| 38 |
features, eg. like Briegel [2] does. (that's more a methological |
| 39 |
that a technical issue). |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
* instead of slotting, assign separate package names when multiple |
| 42 |
version concurrency is required (and maybe pull them together |
| 43 |
via virtuals) |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
* rely on an pure DAG as dependency graph - per definition. |
| 46 |
when circular dependencies occour, fix them in the source tree, |
| 47 |
for example splitting off certain packages in several smaller ones. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
[1] http://www.metux.de/download/oss-qm/normalized_repository.pdf |
| 51 |
[2] https://sourceforge.net/p/briegel/ |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Don't get me wrong, that shall not be understood as ranting against |
| 55 |
Gentoo, just showing suitable approaches we'd start afresh on a |
| 56 |
"green grassland" (w/o all the historical burdens). |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
cu |
| 60 |
-- |
| 61 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 62 |
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/ |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
phone: +49 36207 519931 email: weigelt@×××××.de |
| 65 |
mobile: +49 151 27565287 icq: 210169427 skype: nekrad666 |
| 66 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 67 |
Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme |
| 68 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
Archives