Linux kernel compatability

[Marcel Moolenaar]

On Jan 6, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Warner Losh wrote:

> On 01/05/2011 21:00, Scott Long wrote:
>> I'm sorry, this simply hasn't been true in my experience.  I've worked with companies that have decided to support FreeBSD, and I've worked with companies that have decided not to support FreeBSD.  Emulation has never been used as an excuse to not support FreeBSD.  It's purely a cost/benefit decision.
> 
> Yes.  I've been on the inside of a few of them, even seeing some business case figures.  These usually say that for the segment that company X is going after for product Y can sell 1000 units to customer W and another Z000 to the market as it emerges over the next 2 years.   1000 units gets them $200k profit, development costs are $100k for developer time, test time, etc.  Z is large, so potential revenue form this project is in the millions, with a guaranteed small initial profit.  Decision: go.

But one cannot ignore the fact that a compatibility layer allows companies
to support FreeBSD at lower development cost by eliminating the native port
and instead just focus on the qualifying their Linux support within the
emulation layer. If decisions are purely cost/benefit, then a compatibility
layer reduces the cost, hence increases the benefit so if FreeBSD is at all
a consideration, it will be through emulation.

Is this what we want promote?

Also, the experience that you and Scott have may be biased. You won't want
to work for a company that is inherently Linux centric, right? Likewise,
Linux-centric companies may be more interested in hiring Linux hackers and
not FreeBSD hackers, right? So, doesn't that mean that your experience is
ipso facto biased towards the companies that would even consider FreeBSD
to begin with?
What about those companies that couldn't care less about FreeBSD? Those
for which cost and benefit are absolutes?
I very much doubt that they are going to invest in an entirely new OS --
in order to support it natively, when their Linux-centric development teams
can do the same using emulation?

What I'm saying is this: do we really have an abjective view or are we
biased towards FreeBSD-friendliness simply because we are FreeBSD hackers
discussing on a FreeBSD email list and working for companies that like
FreeBSD in some form or shape?

Are we therefore the right people to argue whether Linux KPI emulation is
good or bad for FreeBSD in the long run?

I'm indecisive. It may be a damned if you do and damned if you don't
kind of scenario. If that's the case, I'd rather be damned without it :-)

-- 
Marcel Moolenaar
xcllnt at mac.com