Lazy Reading: code repos, events, open source stuff


Stuff!

  • I find this erasure of the separation between remote code repository and local code editor very interesting.   It may upset more traditional people.
  • If you haven’t been watching the BSD Events Twitter stream, Dru Lavigne’s written a nice summary of the next few months, including BSD Exam dates/locations.
  • The XFCE 4.8 release announcement hinted at some problems with BSD.  It’s apparently because udev, a Linux-only product, is the only consistent way to access various items, so XFCE’s power and volume controls use it.  There’s no udev on BSD, so we get left out.  I’d normally end this with a call for a compatibility layer, but udev is the latest in a series of jumps from framework to framework in Linux, so I don’t know if it would actually do any good.  (Thanks, sjg on #dragonflybsd for the link)
  • The Economist has an article on open-source that does a hype-free job of describing the state of open source today.  It points out two trends that I don’t think are covered enough: the large amount of open-source work funded by companies, and the hidden costs of training and integration.  One downside of the “software is free, training costs money” model for open source is that it creates an economic incentive for byzantine configurations and difficult setups.  That idea could use some exploration, but I don’t think many people want to, precisely because it’s negative.  The article doesn’t go that far, but they should.
Posted by     Categories: BSD, Conventions, Lazy Reading     3 Comments
3 Comments on Lazy Reading: code repos, events, open source stuff

Respond | Trackback

  1. Anonymous says:

    We actually have udev, i think. alexh@ wrote it

  2. I can’t find a reference for it , digging through man pages. It would be awesome if it was compatible.

  3. Alex Hornung says:

    I wrote libdevattr, which has an API that is very similar and partly compatible with libudev on linux. What is missing is basically some kernel tags for kern_udev and possibly a few more features in libdevattr.

    One of the code-in projects that wasn’t chosen was to actually investigate what parts of libudev are commonly used and we are missing in libdevattr. If someone would dig into that, it would be possible to enhance libdevattr to cover most common scenarios.

    Regards,
    Alex

Respond

Comments

Comments