svn commit: r334939 - head/stand/lua

[Devin Teske]

> On Jun 11, 2018, at 7:07 AM, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 7:36 AM, Devin Teske <dteske at freebsd.org <mailto:dteske at freebsd.org>> wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Jun 10, 2018, at 6:32 PM, Kyle Evans <kevans at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Author: kevans
> > Date: Mon Jun 11 01:32:18 2018
> > New Revision: 334939
> > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/334939 <https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/334939>
> > 
> > Log:
> >  lualoader: Allow brand-*.lua for adding new brands
> > 
> >  dteske@, I believe, had originally pointed out that lualoader failed to
> >  allow logo-*.lua for new logos to be added. When correcting this mistake, I
> >  failed to do the same for brands.
> > 
> 
> You’re doing an amazing job, Kyle.
> 
> I continually see nothing but genuine effort toward feature parity which makes me think one day I can pass the reigns.
> 
> Yeah, I will always love Forth. It will always hold a special place in my heart as that whacky language that simultaneously exudes great power while also having the image ability to induce vomiting 🤮 by the uninitiated.
> 
> However, all that being said, I’d actually like to keep the Ficl boot stuff as an option through to 14.0 and here is why ...
> 
> Last year we were looking to update from ficl3 to ficl4. That may not sound too exciting to most folks, but most folks don’t know the power that ficl4 brings — like the capability to use full networking in the loader! Can lua do that? How cool would it be to be able to communicate with the network from the loader before the kernel is even loaded into memory? I had a few hair-brained schemes left for Forth which might be exciting, lol
> 
> The current boot loader can already communicate via NFS or TFTP today. Adding http would be easy, https would be harder due to crypto being huge and space being small (though bear ssl might be small enough).
> 
> The last articulated plan in arch@ was that LUA will be default in 12, and we plan to remove FORTH in 13. Last time I said it there in February, there was only email agreeing that I could find. This matches the in-person consensus poll I took at BSDcan as well. I think it would take a very extraordinary set circumstance and severe problems with LUA to change those plans.
> 

At BSD Can there was the boot working group where we discussed that an FCP would be required to decide this.

I raised my desires that I would like to be able to flip a knob in 13 and reboot between Ficl and Lua, back and forth.

Give people a choice until we have done a "shake-out" through an entire major version.

An honest-to-goodness procession would be, in my mind:

13: Has both; both are installed. End-user can boot back and forth between the two

Problems that arise in one or the other are non-critical because there is always an "out" by running the other.

14: Has both but both are not installed. The installer media doesn't even have it. You can't install the Forth booth stuff unless you twist a knob in buildworld, optionally going down the path of generating release media which has the Forth boot stuff.

15. It's removed from tree. You can't build Forth boot. Lua only. No looking back, no way to build it with Forth, to get Ficl you need to go to ports. A Ficl with FreeBSD boot words no longer exists and is no longer maintained. All of bhyve userboot also therefore uses Lua.
-- 
Devin