Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Custom ebuilds for CoreOS

["J. Roeleveld" <joost@antarean.org>]

On Wednesday, December 03, 2014 02:39:53 AM Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> Why do I get the feeling that this is another episode of the "i hate
> LennartSoft(tm) too" circlejerk on the gentoo mailing list?

Why do I get the feeling you just want another flamewar?
I don't see any mention of systemd or anything else written by Lennart, apart 
from your comment.

> this mailing list used to be about gentoo.

It still is.

> On Dec 3, 2014 1:38 AM, "James" <wireless@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> > Rich Freeman <rich0 <at> gentoo.org> writes:
> > > > is integration of the best of the CoreOS ideas into "Gentoo proper".
> > > 
> > > I'm not suggesting that "/usr types of systems" are going away.  I'm
> > > just pointing out that they're not really the focus of CoreOS (hosting
> > > them inside containers is, but not running these kinds of applications
> > > in the host itself).
> > 
> > I do not intend to follow the CoreOS commercial path. It intend to mod
> > gentoo to achieve those attractive attributes back into my "gentoo
> > proper".
> > tftp, pxe, dhcp, uefi and many other tools give us a path to
> > running the least (embedded) to the most (complex traditional server)
> > as an extension (compliment) to the cluster. So as was pointed out,
> > I'm merely "lifting" form CoreOS what they lifted from their predicessors;
> > no more no less. I see the gentoo admins being able to move hardrware
> > in and out of the cluster, dynamically and being able to run many
> > sorts of gentoo systems (embedded to fulls server) on a myriad of
> > hardware they own and control.
> > 
> > > You seem to be wanting a minimalist profile of Gentoo, not CoreOS.
> > 
> > YES!, I want Gentoo to "CRUSH" CoreOS because we can and our goal is not
> > to deceptively move users to a "rent the binary" jail. OK?
> > 
> > > < think many of us would love to see that, and I've been an advocate of
> > > paring down  <at> system for just this reason.  I just wouldn't use the
> > > term "CoreOS" with that as this is going to lead to confusion.  CoreOS
> > > is a specialized distro intended to host containers, no more, no less.
> > 
> > OK, we see CoreOS differently. For me it was an Epiphany moment of
> > where I'm been trying to end up, with the aforementioned Gentoo twists.
> > 
> > > It isn't intended as a starting point for embedded projects or such.
> > > Sure, maybe you could make it work, but sooner or later CoreOS will
> > > make some change that will make you very unhappy because they aren't
> > > making it for you.
> > 
> > CoreOS will never be in my critical path. Large corporations will turn
> > computer scientist and hackers into WalMart type-employees. Conglomerates
> > are the enemy, imho. I fear Conglomerates much more than any group
> > of government idiots. ymmv.
> > 
> > (warning digression)
> > 
> >  Just look at the entire "net neutrality"
> > 
> > turf struggle. That sort of "corner the market" monopolistic behavior
> > would not be possible, if we had just maintained the "MAE" precedence
> > for network peering.  Obama had little choice; but, putting networks
> > under SS7 style telecom regulations is a deceptive and horrible idea.
> > Conglomerates lobby congress and get very bad ideas written into law.
> > All we needed is regulation to allow (force) all networks to peer with
> > other networks. The entire concept of "private peering" is horseshit
> > and it should be ended immediately. CoreOS and the "Cloud" lobbyist can
> > easily get regulations passed to put an end to this linux experiment,
> > imho.
> > Differnt subject I know, but the tactics of conglomerates are always the
> > same. Roll up competition and eliminate it, oh all in the name of better
> > security and portecting our 1st amendment rights  and our conglomerates.
> > (sorry of the digression).
> > 
> > > But, again, I'm all for a more lightweight Gentoo profile that doesn't
> > > bundle stuff like openssh, or even an init implementation (since we
> > > have several to choose from now).
> > 
> > Funny, ssh is one of a few things I would put into  drastically reduce
> > @system. ymmv, unless you are going to add something like netconsole.c
> > back into the bundle.
> > 
> > I do not see my vision of the cluster (CoreOS insprired) to be limiting
> > to anyone at Gentoo. Not the embedded folks, not the mimalist, not
> > any init-camp, not the devs, hackers, or wannabees. And certainly
> > not the users. Is this a large undertaking? Certainly. Are the pieces
> > mostly already in existence, just scattered about and transversing time?
> > (methinks YES).
> > 
> > 
> > It all depends on how your vision works. Being older, I see a return to
> > massive diskless nodes being what CoreOS and the entire "Cloud Vendor"
> > conglomerates want. Conversely, I see those cheap microP now accompanied
> > by
> > enormous amount of ram and SSD that is dirt cheap forming the building
> > blocks for the Gentoo cluster paradigm shift. I see Gentoo "smashing" that
> > "Cloud-vendor CoreOS" paradigm by provide what they offer and so much more
> > (full /usr systems) out of the same core codebase. I see Gentoo keeping
> > the
> > rank and file computer scientists and hackers, gamefully employed.   I see
> > the CoreOS folks migrating computer scientists and hackers to the Walmart
> > model of underemployment at a few conglomerates.
> > 
> > Gentoo provides an excellent set of choices  and a very bright future for
> > me
> > (cluster). Other can pick their own poison....
> > 
> > 
> > peace,
> > && thanks
> > 
> > James