6 ms·

Shhh! Don't criticize Linux even if it's true, you'll get downvoted faster than you can bat an eyelash! That's extremely unpopular here. 'Cause you know, man.

by Annatar 10y ago

Shhh! Don't criticize Linux even if it's true, you'll get downvoted faster than you can bat an eyelash! That's extremely unpopular here. 'Cause you know, man. Linux.

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
Hey, I run Linux. I just think that it's worth acknowledging that it's got some flaws. One of the reasons I listen to people like Bryan Cantrill. I don't take what he and the BSD folks say at face value - If they're working on competing projects, they obviously don't like Linux technically - but sometimes, they're right. Especially about epoll. Jesus. Anyway, GP is +3. It got downvoted a ton, but it bounced back.
- Annatar 10y ago
  Competing projects or not, Bryan is correct. The FreeBSD folks also have a pretty good clue.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    Well, yeah. But I can't trust him out of hand. Are you a Plan9 user, by any chance?
    - Annatar 10y ago
      Nope; Solaris / illumos / SmartOS.
      - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        Ah. I think my plan9 user detector must have been confused by the air of smugness, and the appearance of desiring Murray Hill purism, something plan9 users have that illumos users don't (SMF, for one, isn't Murray Hill at all in style). So long as you don't attack my beloved sexprs in your attack on XML, I don't care.
        Annatar 10y ago
        I like the fathers of UNIX, it's true; I think the way they think, and over the course of the last 30 years of using computers, I've discovered that my experience with computers matches their experience. I can see why they came up with the tenets they did. It all makes sense. As for XML in SMF, that is a sad part of history: at the time, Sun Microsystems had the guy who invented XML (Tim Bray, was it?) on the payroll, and suddenly, XML started forcefully infiltrating everywhere into UNIX, whether it was appropriate or not. I don't know anyone who's happy about having XML SMF manifests. All of us from the Solaris / illumos community would rather we never speak of that embarrassment again, I think. On LISP: I would love to use it, except getting it to run on Solaris / illumos sucks ass, and when one does get it to run, it's only 32-bit, and it likes to coredump a lot. And I'm not going back to GNU/Linux just to be able to run LISP. Other than that, I find LISP cool. I think that reentrant functional programming with no state machine is the way to go, and I like the fact that one can run LISP both interpreted and compiled into a binary executable. I've no idea what "sexprs" is.
        qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        I actually wasn't talking about XML, I was talking about the general design of SMF. Murray Hill purists, champions of worse is better, would call SMF's architecture overly complicated and call for the use of BSD init, daemontools, s6, or runit. As a linux user, I see SMF as the good bits of systemd (service management, etc), without a lot of the bad bits (creeping scope, gradual introduction of lock-in, kills your screen sessions for no reason, sinister plans for world domination...). It's almost like Lennart has an instinct for getting good ideas exactly wrong. As for Lisp on Illumos, which Lisp did you try? For Common Lisp, CLISP, CMUCL, and SBCL all claim to support Solaris. SBCL is the most popular of the three, but its solaris binary is a little out of date, so you'll have to use it to compile the latest sources. Instructions at http://www.sbcl.org/getting.html http://www.sbcl.org/getting.html. However, I am primarily a schemer, and if you're excited about lisp-1s, hygenic macros, tail calls, call/cc, and case sensitivity, you may want to look into scheme. Because of the minimally defined spec, every scheme is a little different. Chicken scheme, my favorite implementation, claims to run on x86 solaris, although it hasn't been tested on the latest versions. It may still work. MIT scheme explicity claims to run on any posix system, but it's kinda dead. Guile will probably run, as GNU projects usually try to be reasonably platform independant, but it's hard to tell. As both the above are GNU, so you'll need GCC, but I assume that's already installed on your system. Chibi Scheme, Gambit, and Chez Scheme are also worth a shot, although they have less libraries than the above. Finally, Racket, which isn't really a scheme so much a a new programming language descended from Scheme (as I understand it, many of the Racket implementers backed the ill-fated R6RS, but wanted to go even further, and got sick of compromising with Scheme). I don't personally like it, but you may, and it also claims POSIX. If none of the above run at their latest version, which I very much doubt, you could always try lx zones as a last resort. sexprs is an abreviation for s-expressions. They're what make up a lisp program, and how lispers store data: Typically, in a lisp program, your config file won't be a unixy .cfg, but instead a lisp program, which is much more powerful. However, like XML, it's kinda hard to grab data with regex, although unlike xml, it's trivial to parse.

by Annatar 10y ago

Shhh! Don't criticize Linux even if it's true, you'll get downvoted faster than you can bat an eyelash! That's extremely unpopular here. 'Cause you know, man. Linux.

qwertyuiop924 10y ago

Hey, I run Linux. I just think that it's worth acknowledging that it's got some flaws. One of the reasons I listen to people like Bryan Cantrill. I don't take what he and the BSD folks say at face value - If they're working on competing projects, they obviously don't like Linux technically - but sometimes, they're right. Especially about epoll. Jesus. Anyway, GP is +3. It got downvoted a ton, but it bounced back.

Annatar 10y ago
Competing projects or not, Bryan is correct. The FreeBSD folks also have a pretty good clue.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Well, yeah. But I can't trust him out of hand. Are you a Plan9 user, by any chance?
  - Annatar 10y ago
    Nope; Solaris / illumos / SmartOS.
    - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      Ah. I think my plan9 user detector must have been confused by the air of smugness, and the appearance of desiring Murray Hill purism, something plan9 users have that illumos users don't (SMF, for one, isn't Murray Hill at all in style). So long as you don't attack my beloved sexprs in your attack on XML, I don't care.
      - Annatar 10y ago
        I like the fathers of UNIX, it's true; I think the way they think, and over the course of the last 30 years of using computers, I've discovered that my experience with computers matches their experience. I can see why they came up with the tenets they did. It all makes sense. As for XML in SMF, that is a sad part of history: at the time, Sun Microsystems had the guy who invented XML (Tim Bray, was it?) on the payroll, and suddenly, XML started forcefully infiltrating everywhere into UNIX, whether it was appropriate or not. I don't know anyone who's happy about having XML SMF manifests. All of us from the Solaris / illumos community would rather we never speak of that embarrassment again, I think. On LISP: I would love to use it, except getting it to run on Solaris / illumos sucks ass, and when one does get it to run, it's only 32-bit, and it likes to coredump a lot. And I'm not going back to GNU/Linux just to be able to run LISP. Other than that, I find LISP cool. I think that reentrant functional programming with no state machine is the way to go, and I like the fact that one can run LISP both interpreted and compiled into a binary executable. I've no idea what "sexprs" is.
        qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        I actually wasn't talking about XML, I was talking about the general design of SMF. Murray Hill purists, champions of worse is better, would call SMF's architecture overly complicated and call for the use of BSD init, daemontools, s6, or runit. As a linux user, I see SMF as the good bits of systemd (service management, etc), without a lot of the bad bits (creeping scope, gradual introduction of lock-in, kills your screen sessions for no reason, sinister plans for world domination...). It's almost like Lennart has an instinct for getting good ideas exactly wrong. As for Lisp on Illumos, which Lisp did you try? For Common Lisp, CLISP, CMUCL, and SBCL all claim to support Solaris. SBCL is the most popular of the three, but its solaris binary is a little out of date, so you'll have to use it to compile the latest sources. Instructions at http://www.sbcl.org/getting.html http://www.sbcl.org/getting.html. However, I am primarily a schemer, and if you're excited about lisp-1s, hygenic macros, tail calls, call/cc, and case sensitivity, you may want to look into scheme. Because of the minimally defined spec, every scheme is a little different. Chicken scheme, my favorite implementation, claims to run on x86 solaris, although it hasn't been tested on the latest versions. It may still work. MIT scheme explicity claims to run on any posix system, but it's kinda dead. Guile will probably run, as GNU projects usually try to be reasonably platform independant, but it's hard to tell. As both the above are GNU, so you'll need GCC, but I assume that's already installed on your system. Chibi Scheme, Gambit, and Chez Scheme are also worth a shot, although they have less libraries than the above. Finally, Racket, which isn't really a scheme so much a a new programming language descended from Scheme (as I understand it, many of the Racket implementers backed the ill-fated R6RS, but wanted to go even further, and got sick of compromising with Scheme). I don't personally like it, but you may, and it also claims POSIX. If none of the above run at their latest version, which I very much doubt, you could always try lx zones as a last resort. sexprs is an abreviation for s-expressions. They're what make up a lisp program, and how lispers store data: Typically, in a lisp program, your config file won't be a unixy .cfg, but instead a lisp program, which is much more powerful. However, like XML, it's kinda hard to grab data with regex, although unlike xml, it's trivial to parse.