Re: NetBSD with a gaming keyboard

[Swift Griggs <swiftgriggs%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Tue, 15 Aug 2017, Christian Baer wrote:
> I haven't actually seen the new one. It has tempted me for a while now, 
> but all too often, remakes of movies I knew as a child, have not been 
> too good. Just think of Star Wars Ep1. So, I was actually quoting the 
> 1982 movie.

There is no equal to Jar Jar Binks in the new Tron. However, I have very 
little nostalgia about the old one. So, YMMV, but I thought the new one 
was even better. Flynn's Arcade was awesome, especially the scene with the 
psuedo-Unix machine he "enters" the grid via.

> This is actually the part that I am a little nervous about. If a drive 
> breaks and I have to replace it, will the rebuild work correctly?

Yes. I can vouch for that. However, once I have basic operations like bad 
disc replacement taken care of, I don't spend much time worrying about the 
block level for resiliency. I worry about file level *backups*. Then it 
doesn't matter what you use for a backing store unless it's too slow or 
too unstable.

> Because I have not actually followed the development of ZFS on different 
> platforms, you lost me a bit.

To the point then, Oracle thinks *they* are the single-source-of-truth 
about ZFS. Their versioning scheme reflects that.

> I remember reading a while back that FreeBSD is or could be the de facto 
> reference (development) platform for ZFS and not Solaris.

Well it could be a reference platform, depending on who you ask, as long 
as you don't ask Oracle. The version of ZFS that comes with Solaris 11 is 
so different it simply won't work with anyone else's anymore, including 
freeware Solaris distributions.

> Since I had no plans to use Solaris (which really sucked rocks 
> concerning hardware support on amd64 the last time I checked)

I haven't had problems with AMD64 hardware with Solaris x86_64, but I've 
got massive problems with recommending it due to SMF being an unvarnished 
turd pool in my opinion (along with 100% of the other places where they 
implemented XML and binary-opaque SQLite databases which replaced static 
text files). Most of the actual Solaris 11 bugs I've seen have been with 
networking code and dladm. I work in a support role for legacy and current 
Unix systems. 90% of the calls I get on Solaris now are for changing basic 
IP setups since it's become such an unreliable PITA mere mortals can't 
figure out how to make it work consistently, even after doing everything 
Oracle's documentation says and it still won't work. Several have 
downgraded back to Solaris 10 or permanently delayed upgrading from 
Solaris 8 or 10 after experiences with 11. We shouldn't be too surprised. 
In my personal opinion, SunOS/Solaris has been going downhill ever since 
the move to SysV with a brief pause at SunOS 5.6 and 5.8.

> I don't know. I always imagined that because FreeBSD hat great working 
> disc encryption via the GEOM subsystem (i.e. geli and gbde) - and both 
> work well with ZFS - there was little motivation to include and maintain 
> another encryption system.

Except for the fact that ZFS is it's own volume management system and can 
compete with GEOM as well as cooperating with it. So, it's conceivable 
that someone might want encryption without the hassle or complication of 
GEOM and staying with "native" ZFS zpool block devices. There is 
chattering in FreeBSD land on just that topic, and the natives don't seem 
satisfied with GELI. See this thread:

https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/56869/

There are distinct and specific advantages of having encryption in the 
ZFS/zpool toolbox due to the architecture of the L2ARC and ZIL. So, it's 
not even a wrongheaded thing to want.

> Basically, I have to ask: What is the current status/version of ZFS on 
> Solaris, NetBSD and FreeBSD? Linux is a special case due to the "unique" 
> and annoying license.

My assertion would be the current state of ZFS for all of them is 
"Fragmented and dynamic". I will point out with a certain level of 
schadenfreude that Linux seems to be the *least* well integrated and 
functional of the lot. They can thank the GPL for that.

> I don't quite see the parallels here.

Okay forget the stupid analogy. I'll be blunt. I find the expectation by 
Oracle that folks will bow to *their* special snowflake version of ZFS 
annoying. We aren't all going to buy an Oracle service contract for 
Solaris 11 due to the overwhelming greatness of the judgment of the ZFS 
coders at Oracle. We don't owe them anything except maybe pat on the head 
for the original ZFS effort which was basically done by a mostly different 
group of people in a different company that no longer exists. I don't feel 
any technical debt to Oracle. They are just owners of some aging IP.

Honestly, they seem to be more interested in BTRFS than in ZFS sometimes.

> If the kind of music (or whatever) you make is exactly what the people 
> want, good for you!

... and my point is if you make a garbage album to appease your "artistic 
vision", don't go on talk shows crying about how your fans have abandoned 
you. They didn't sign up to funnel you money. It was a quid-pro-quo from 
the start. Nobody is "entitled" to fans, especially Oracle.

> I don't quite get what this has to do with ZFS on Solaris or anything 
> else - especially because Solaris is not exactly Oracle's main cash cow.

Sorry, but at least I warned you it was a rant.

> But as long as ZFS works, I probably won't have any pain that compels me 
> to make any changes.

I'll take your word for it, but my point is a general one, not specific to 
your scenario. I'm saying that when a OS decides to combine it's volume 
management with a single file system, what happens when either part 
becomes obsolete before the other? You are stuck with both. What happens 
when you want an optimized file system for flash or a volume management 
scheme comes out with asynchronous block replication (ala DRBD-Proxy or 
SRDF/A) over a WAN (something ZFS can't do *at all*)? You'd be forced to 
throw one away even though it was due to a deficit in functionality with 
the other. Even today, if you compare only zpools with GEOM, I believe 
GEOM wins - it has more features and has had longer to stabilize. The same 
is true comparing zpools to LVM2. Only the combination of ZFS + zpool 
makes the whole thing viable, but it's also a drawback for OS maintainers.

Consider why 'tar' has lasted so long. They chose to decouple the 
archiving task with the compression task. So, even when a superior 
compression formats come out, we keep using tar. That's why 'zip' is 
deprecated on Unix platforms. We disdain it because of it's inferior 
compression rates, no matter what it can do as an archiver. This is one of 
the key parts of the Unix philosophy, at least in my opinion. We design 
things to be small, so they can be easily integrated or *un*-integrated.

> I have bought and tried at lease 5 of these - none of them worked.

Hmm, sorry to hear that. I haven't had any problems with the models I've 
got, but as I mentioned, I use PS/2 repeaters habitually.

> I don't quite see what the deal is here. The USB specs allow for a much 
> higher power consumption than the PS/2 specs do.  But somehow all the 
> converters I have seen seem to be stuck on the 100mA minimal setting.

The USB devices set their own power budget. 100mA is too small and it 
sounds like the converters are badly designed in that case. The PS/2 spec 
says current can be as high as 250mA.

> Actually, I didn't want to restrict that to the Model Ms. :-) But I have 
> no idea which one the M5-2 is. I came up blank on Unicomp's page and I 
> had no real luck ducking it either.

It's from the early 1990's. I think there is a picture of one on the 
Model-M Wikipedia page. There used to be, at least. I got it used at a 
junk shop.

> But I enjoy the sound in any case.

Sound provides typing feedback and can increase touch typing speed. I 
agree that it's a useful cue.

> One of my colleagues told me, that he finds my typing very soothing. :-)

Then you have had a different experience than me. In "open seating" 
environments people tend to go ballistic and complain to management about 
mechanical keyboards. Of course, that also gives the management a good 
list of "whiners with too much time on their hands that I should fire for 
being unable to figure out headphones" so maybe it's not a total loss. 
:-)

> The MX browns to me have no way near the same feel as the blues. The 
> other guys in our office have these, because they don't like the feel of 
> the blue ones.

The only Cherry MX keys I can stand are the blue. The rest feel terrible 
to me. They either have too high of a "break-weight", not enough tactile 
feedback, or both.

> One thing that can be said for the Unicomp keyboards is that the 
> stickers look absolutely atrocious - especially the one "decorating" the 
> capslock/numlock lights.

Agreed. That looks like crap. It looks like some rinky-dink sticker I'd 
apply to an Easter egg.

> And they are not build quite as well as the old Model Ms with the silver 
> sticker in the top right.

You can tell when you pick them up, too. The IBM models are often twice as 
heavy due to the metal plate on the bottom.

> > It's also the loudest, unfortunately.
> What makes it so loud (compared to the others)?

The keyboard chassis design is more open; so more noise escapes.

> I'm not sure why you are explicitly stating that the Romer-G are 
> non-linear, because somehow all the keys we have been talking about are 
> just that.

Just to say "it's a real mechanical keyboard, not a trick or a so-called 
gamer keyboard only"

> I've always wanted to test the Romer-Gs and when I get the chance, I 
> probably will give them a shot.

I doubt you will like them based on what you've written. They are somewhat 
similar to Cherry MX brown switches, but the key difference is that they 
have a more tactile feel. You can feel the switch "pop" under your finger 
like a Model-M spring, but they are much more "mushy" than an MX blue. 
They are something between the MX blue and the MX brown, but for whatever 
reason, I can type very fast on them.

> We need one or two new keyboards in the office anyways. :-) But I am 
> pretty sure that even if I like the feel of them, I will miss the noise.

You would. They are very quiet compared with an MX blue keyboard for sure.

> This is my English failing me again... :-/ To me "scalloped" has to do 
> with melting cheese over something.

If someone melts cheese on my G910 we are going to have some words. :-)

> I doubt you mean that. If you mean the clam, I still can't quite grasp 
> the point you are making.

The keys have a specific shape which is something of an inverted parabola. 
The shape helps my tactile feel distinguish my home-row keys and basically 
type faster because the keys are slightly different shaped from one side 
to the other. Thus, I can navigate the keyboard by touch alone, unlike a 
chicklet keyboard where there aren't any physical key shapes to use as 
reference.

> Are you referring to the ridge to the top of the keys?  This seems to be 
> a normal trait for gaming keyboards, but it hasn't bothered me yet.

Yes, this is common for gaming keyboards, but the G910 has a more 
engineered approach to it. Each key is slightly more or less parabolic 
depending on how far from the center they are.


> I don't like typical chicklet keyboard either (although my Lenoval 
> laptop has one). To me it has all the disadvantages of an onscreen 
> keyboad on a tablet.

I agree. They might as well go ahead and make the whole laptop a folding 
clamshell touchscreen. At least having two screens might make the pain of 
a crappy keyboard easier to bear (I doubt it, though).

> Let me give you a hint... :-D
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BnLbv6QYcA

Revolutionary... uhhhh, yeah. :->

> That is something I am currently waiting on. :-)

It sounds like he's made progress in -current, give it a shot.

> I would associate with someone who is KeWl or thinks he 5h0uld wr1t3 
> funny. D@mn! :-)

I agree. The colorwheel effect also gets old. However, it's not as bad as 
some. My Razor Blackwidow is worse and looks like a real 37337 gamerz 
KeyB0rd.

> I'd miss the palm rest and the numbers block, which I use a lot.

The Das keyboard is nice, but it's just a typical Cherry MX blue 
mechanical keyboard. The only thing interesting about it is that they make 
them without keylabels. That's a help if you do not want modern 
phone-zombies typing on your rig. They can't touch-type!

> One thing I like about my K70 is the way the switches are just mounted
> on a metal plate:

Those are interesting. It's got some cleaning advantages as you mention, 
too.

-Swift