4 ms·

It'd be awesome if this was BSD licensed, so that in the future when it is stable it could appear in FreeBSD as the replacement to it's current initd.

fullwedgewhale 11y ago
Not being BSD license I would expect it never to get beyond the ports tree.
- X-Istence 11y ago
  Yup, that is my worry too.
JdeBP 11y ago
Both nosh and NextBSD launchd are BSD licensed.
- X-Istence 11y ago
  I really like that it takes some things from SMF. I honestly don't think that porting all of Mach over just to get launchd is a great idea...
  - Alphasite_ 11y ago
    Its only the IPC layer...
    - JdeBP 11y ago
      ... and it is thus in the same boat as systemd. The IPC layer for getting launchd to work involves amongst other things FreeBSD kernel changes to support the Mach IPC API; similarly to how the systemd people have already achieved (subreapers) and have been pushing for further (kernel Desktop Bus) kernel changes for systemd's benefit; and indeed much like how IBM AIX gained kernel augmentations for supporting the System Resource Controller: the SIGFORCE and SIGNORM signals and the SRC_kex.ext extension. vezzy-fnord is I suspect refraining from pointing to http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/08/26/0/ http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/08/26/0/ (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10127120 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10127120). (-:
  - JdeBP 11y ago
    ... still leaving you, after you subtracted SystemXVI because of the licence and launchd because of the XNU stuff that had to be ported to support it, with at least one BSD-licensed non-Mach replacement for rc.d already available.
    - X-Istence 11y ago
      Except that due to it being of the daemontools family, it doesn't get the same sort of treatment as something like SystemXVI or SystemD. Sadly.
      - JdeBP 11y ago
        Looking at some of the treatment that SystemXVI has received so far, I'm not sure that it's entirely a sad thing. (-: In happy news, nosh has a picture and a Burns allusion: * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwares/nosh/user-vt-screenshots.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwa... * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwares/nosh/timorous-admin-installation-how-to.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwa...
yellowapple 11y ago
It uses a "modified BSD license" (https://github.com/ServiceManager/ServiceManager/blob/master/doc/CPYRIGHT.md https://github.com/ServiceManager/ServiceManager/blob/master...).
- JdeBP 11y ago
  It didn't at the time that X-Istence wrote that.

fullwedgewhale 11y ago

Not being BSD license I would expect it never to get beyond the ports tree.

X-Istence 11y ago
Yup, that is my worry too.

JdeBP 11y ago

Both nosh and NextBSD launchd are BSD licensed.

X-Istence 11y ago
I really like that it takes some things from SMF. I honestly don't think that porting all of Mach over just to get launchd is a great idea...
- Alphasite_ 11y ago
  Its only the IPC layer...
  - JdeBP 11y ago
    ... and it is thus in the same boat as systemd. The IPC layer for getting launchd to work involves amongst other things FreeBSD kernel changes to support the Mach IPC API; similarly to how the systemd people have already achieved (subreapers) and have been pushing for further (kernel Desktop Bus) kernel changes for systemd's benefit; and indeed much like how IBM AIX gained kernel augmentations for supporting the System Resource Controller: the SIGFORCE and SIGNORM signals and the SRC_kex.ext extension. vezzy-fnord is I suspect refraining from pointing to http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/08/26/0/ http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/08/26/0/ (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10127120 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10127120). (-:
- JdeBP 11y ago
  ... still leaving you, after you subtracted SystemXVI because of the licence and launchd because of the XNU stuff that had to be ported to support it, with at least one BSD-licensed non-Mach replacement for rc.d already available.
  - X-Istence 11y ago
    Except that due to it being of the daemontools family, it doesn't get the same sort of treatment as something like SystemXVI or SystemD. Sadly.
    - JdeBP 11y ago
      Looking at some of the treatment that SystemXVI has received so far, I'm not sure that it's entirely a sad thing. (-: In happy news, nosh has a picture and a Burns allusion: * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwares/nosh/user-vt-screenshots.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwa... * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwares/nosh/timorous-admin-installation-how-to.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Softwa...

yellowapple 11y ago

It uses a "modified BSD license" (https://github.com/ServiceManager/ServiceManager/blob/master/doc/CPYRIGHT.md https://github.com/ServiceManager/ServiceManager/blob/master...).

JdeBP 11y ago
It didn't at the time that X-Istence wrote that.