From: ptkwt@... (Phil Tomson) Date: 2004-03-04T02:09:45+09:00 Subject: Re: [ANN] Rubyx OS (Ruby oriented linux distro) In article <200403030958.25029.andrew@walrond.org>, Andrew Walrond wrote: >On Wednesday 03 Mar 2004 09:44, Phil Tomson wrote: >> In article , >> >> Benny wrote: >> > >> >damned! I had the same idea. but I would choose FreeBSD as underlying >> >system. a ports-tool (portupgrade) already is in ruby. >> >> Why not go ahead with that idea? Couldn't you use the rubyx script to >> just as easily build a FreeBSD system (might need some modifications of >> course, but you could probably save a lot of the work that would be >> required to do it from scratch). I like this idea because, as you say, >> portupgrade is already in ruby (and I like the BSD ports system). It >> would be really cool if the rubyx script could completely build a *nix >> OS/system including your choice of kernal (be it Linux, or *BSD (even >> including Darwin)). That would be the ultimate in flexibility. > >Well, I'm not familiar with the BSD kernel build process, but there is no >fundamental reason that the bsd kernel should not be just another package as >far as rubyx is concerned. That is all that happens with the linux kernel. >Same goes for the Hurd, really. > That's great. >> >> question: could the ruby-based init system be used with *BSD as well? >> > >Don't see why not Again, good news. It essentially moves Rubyx to a different level. Lots of people who posted responses to your /. post just assumed Rubyx was just another Linux distro. But it's really much more flexible than that. > >> >> Is there a ruby-command-shell or are you proposing irb be used? >> > >I don't think irb is a viable bash replacement. An rshell would be an >interesting project though. I'm suprised nobody has had a go yet... > > Yeah, I don't think irb is a good choice either, I was just wondering what ruby shell they were talking about. Phil