Conversation

Replying to and
I've followed the whole "capabilities" thing for decades and never found any value in it besides "lets just pretend we're not root despite having complex interacting powers that are hard to reason about and almost always root-equivalent".
2
1
Replying to and
It's not at all the same kind of thing as *nix capabilities but rather FreeBSD Capsicum. It's an object capability system for associating rights with objects. It's not something bolted on to an existing system but rather what it's based around in the first place though.
1
6
I skimmed through that and I love how they have some of the basic concepts from my vaporware kernel (fs being provided by a userspace process, only visible to procs attached to it) but then botched a lot to make that happen s.t. mmap is read-only. 🤦🤦🤦
3
...and demand paging doesn't exist. 🤦 ...and you have to use mmap rather than read for performance. 🤦 This all comes out naturally right if the only underlying operation is mmap-like and read/write are always kernel-mediated memcpys.
2
1
Replying to and
I think the reason that it's not implemented is simply that only BlobFS implements demand paging so far and BlobFS is write-once content addressable. I don't think there's any design issue or blocker for it. They just haven't gotten around to implementing it for a normal fs yet.
1
2
F2FS has really great performance and reliability but it's only currently a serious choice where you're heavily testing major kernel upgrades in advance and are completely sure you won't need to downgrade. I'm sure that hurts the development-focused Fuchsia use case right now.
1
1
I still use ext4 on my workstations in case I ever need to downgrade the kernel, especially since I use a rolling release distribution. OS development with that constraint is probably not fun. I broke that rule before and had to reformat since F2FS became unable to reuse space.
1
Show replies