Mail archive
alpine-devel

Re: [alpine-devel] Alpine features and the future

From: Natanael Copa <ncopa_at_alpinelinux.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:05:45 +0200

On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 09:22:16 -0300
Alba Pompeo <albapompeo_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Regarding netbsd-curses instead of, sabotage-linux seems to have been
> successful with that.
> According to them only "a small percentage of apps written for ncurses
> poke at internals and need light patching".
> And the benefits are huge.
> https://github.com/sabotage-linux/netbsd-curses

The size benefits are appealing.

-nc

>
>
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 5:16 AM, Natanael Copa <ncopa_at_alpinelinux.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 21:01:32 +0100
> > Cág <ca6c_at_bitmessage.ch> wrote:
> >
> >> Apparently there has been some sort of speculation regarding
> >> replacement of some components of the system with others, and
> >> apparently many moons ago last time, at least on this list.
> >
> > Replacing core components requires a signinficant amount of work. Its
> > not like we have overflow of resources and look for things to spend our
> > time on.
> >
> > So if we replace core components it needs to justify the time spent on
> > it and the risk of break things for users.
> >
> > In other words, we don't replaces components just because we can.
> >
> >> I would like to know Alpine developers' and users' positions on:
> >>
> >> 1. BusyBox. Does it need a replacement such as sbase/ubase,
> >> The Heirloom Toolchest, ToyBox or maybe even 9base or Coreutils?
> >
> > no.
> >
> >> 2. GNU software. Should it be replaced by analogues? For example,
> >> make with bmake, bc with heirloom bc, bison with byacc, ncurses
> >> with NetBSD curses.
> >
> > replacing GNU make is not a goal, specially if it require us to
> > refactor Makefiles of 1000+ packages.
> >
> > we ship both bison and byacc. You are free to use any.
> >
> > ncurses thoug, I wouldn't mind replace GNU ncurses as I have had some
> > issues in the past with it. (Headers got wrong so lots of packages got
> > miscompiled). Before replacing ncurses I want be relatively sure that
> > it will not break things.
> >
> >> 3. gcc/clang
> >
> > Shiz has been working on it and I would not mind replace gcc with clang
> > as default compiler.
> >
> >>
> >> 4. OpenRC. Should Alpine switch to an alternative like runit, s6
> >> or svc? Should /sbin/init be sinit?
> >
> > openrc sort of does the job, but i'm not 100% happy with it. I like the
> > ideas behind s6 but find it a bit "weird" (due to djb style) and I find
> > it bigger than I'd like.
> >
> >> 5. In case of replacing BusyBox with something that lacks an
> >> editor, what would become the default? nvi, vim, neovim, elvis
> >> traditional vi, nano or vis? Or maybe there will be two like
> >> in OpenBSD or a load as in Slackware?
> >>
> >> 6. What would be the default shell? mksh, pksh or dash? Or maybe
> >> bash?
> >
> > i don't see any reason to replace busybox.
> >
> > -nc
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
> > Help: alpine-devel+help_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
> > ---
> >
>
>
> ---
> Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
> Help: alpine-devel+help_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
> ---
>



---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Received on Fri Jun 16 2017 - 16:05:45 GMT