<div dir="ltr">Well said Keith.<div><br></div><div>The idea here is to give OI (and any other distributors who might happen to care) a chance to react, and work together with us; not to give OI veto powers over a direction that makes obvious sense.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Right now, parted and co. are rotting bits in illumos. Nobody maintains them. Most of us don't want them, and few have even used them. I have used parted *once* in my entire life. That's it. And that was about six years ago. Can't imagine using it today.</div>
<div><br></div><div>If OI (or someone else) wants them, they can always get them from source history and set up a separate package to deal with them. That's always been relatively straight-forward. In fact, these bits should have been in a separate repo pretty much from the time they were first introduced. Now we can correct that.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Running illumos on bare metal makes great sense; as a hypervisor, you want to do that. But that use case is completely at adds with the idea of running dual boot.</div><div><br></div><div>The dual boot use case is/was primarily intended for folks to be able to use have multiple OS' on their hardware, and predates virtualization technology. These days, dual booting is just plain silly, and I cannot imagine that I will ever configure a system for dual boot -- not just with illumos, but with *any* OS. Its just too damned inconvenient to reboot to get to a different environment. (Ok, special exception for lab systems, where I need to run hardware sensitive tests -- like device drivers -- from different OS images. But I absolutely neither need nor want to shrink partition tables there. In fact, most often I have totally separate physical disks. This use case is also atypical -- being primarily folks who work on physical device drivers. These days I think anyone who dual boots and isn't writing hardware drivers is either doing so as result of an installation decision made years ago -- understandable, or is just insane.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>I have to confess that I use VMware (a commercial v12n product) for my illumos work these days -- in fact right now I have a couple of different OS' running on my laptop at the same time -- MacOS, 2 instances of illumos, an instance of Windows, and an instance of CentOS. It just wouldn't be practical to do this multi boot.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I do believe that the main performance problems with building illumos inside VirtualBox have been resolved. I have heard a number of anecdotal reports suggesting this -- I've not personally verified it myself, however (being quite happy with VMware.)</div>
<div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Keith Wesolowski via illumos-developer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:developer@lists.illumos.org" target="_blank">developer@lists.illumos.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="">On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Nikola M. via illumos-developer wrote:<br>
<br>
> OI is not prepared for this change untill parted and gparted are put<br>
> inside OI to serve it's users like they used to. (Would also thing other<br>
> distros should be informed about is at least) If Gparted and parted are<br>
> not illumos problem anymore, then don't let there be more problems for<br>
> users.<br>
<br>
</div>We have been notified. You guys are the only ones who seem to care,<br>
which is not surprising since this use case is no longer seen in the<br>
markets most other distributors have focused on. Since nothing in ON<br>
depends on this, the correct decision is the one that's been taken: to<br>
remove it. As a courtesy, distributors were pinged so that anyone who<br>
wants to continue shipping this software will have an opportunity to<br>
make other arrangements for doing so. That's why this thread exists.<br>
<br>
As distributors and members of the illumos community, it is our dual<br>
responsibility to ensure that ON has the right contents and that our<br>
respective customer bases are properly served by the products we ship.<br>
It does not behoove us to insist that ON deliver something inappropriate<br>
to its general architecture solely for the benefit of our own customers.<br>
That's why you have oi-userland, we have illumos-extra, and other<br>
distributors have similar analogues. Having to make one's own<br>
provisions for alternate delivery is simply part and parcel of being a<br>
distributor and should not induce the anger and hostility I'm reading<br>
here.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
-------------------------------------------<br>
illumos-developer<br>
Archives: <a href="https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/182179/=now" target="_blank">https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/182179/=now</a><br>
RSS Feed: <a href="https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/182179/21239177-3604570e" target="_blank">https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/182179/21239177-3604570e</a><br>
Modify Your Subscription: <a href="https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21239177&id_secret=21239177-2d0c9337" target="_blank">https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21239177&id_secret=21239177-2d0c9337</a><br>
Powered by Listbox: <a href="http://www.listbox.com" target="_blank">http://www.listbox.com</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>