[haiku-development] Re: What's the status of Haiku?
- From: Sia Lang <silverlanguage@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 21:28:24 +0200
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:59 PM, Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> By replacing the kernel and the app server? I don't think there are any
> larger missing features in either area that we consider blockers for R1.
> So, while in the long run it might be a good move to keep up with kernel
> level features and drivers, I don't see how it helps with the "almost
> there" situation. Our IMAP implementation will still be broken and our
> package management solution will still require a lot of work.
>
>
I think the Haiku package manager is insanely and unnecessarily
complicated. I will have something to say about that later.
>
> On 18.08.2014 18:07, Sia Lang wrote:
>
>> Whatever the reasons were back then, I've come far enough to reach this
>> important conclusion: No patch needs to be maintained, and you can
>> easily draw a "don't cross this line" at the kit->kernel/composer
>> transition layer (not without tricks, but they're completely
>> self-contained in a kernel module).
>>
>
> Out of curiosity, how do you implement stuff like opening directories by
> inode ID, typed attribute and query support in a self-contained kernel
> module? To me, they sound very much like they need direct support by the
> VFS and the FS implementations.
>
Through a befs module implementing the actual fs (not my impl) and a vfs
module that translates and mediates to the befs implementation (my impl)
>
> Anyway, the proof is in the pudding, so let's go to work ;)
>>
>
> Good luck! Please do keep us posted.
>
Thanks! And will do :)
Sia.
Other related posts:
