Slashdot Mirror
Plan9 is now Officially Open Source
DrSkwid writes "The OSI have approved the revised license for the plan 9 operating system according to attendees returning from this year's Usenix Bof."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
"So, is this operating system from outer space as well?"
Guh-haw guh-haw!
Gee, you don't think that's where they got the name from in the first place, do you?
This is great news for the Open Source community. While Plan9 is often rediculed as being outdated, it no doubt has its share of novel and useful algorithms, which may now be incorporated into more mainstream open source OSes such as Linux and the HURD (yes, it's still around).
Open sourcing OS code has proven to be a good way to keep ailing systems relevant in the current marketplace. It kept BeOS and VMS from dying in obscurity, and even helped BSD limp along for a few more years.
I predict nothing but good things from GNU/Plan9. Hopefully Debian will introduce a Plan9 distro, to go with their Darwin, HURD, and Linux distrii. I still have a few spare boxen lying around that I could use this on.
Boromir, son of Faramir, King of Gondor and Minas Tirith
Although the intent does not conflict with the GPL I think the requirment of commercial distributors to defend contributors against certain suits might be a show stopper beacause of how it's written. But IANAL; can someone comment on this?
The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
I don't particularly like the concept of my computer being part of some massive hive-mind. All it takes is one [cr|h]acker to kill all the PCs in the world.
the Plan 9 approach seems useful for stuff that needs extreme abstraction of resources, but exactly what needs that? At that level you need to have access to the guts.
It seems that this rewrite was an attempt to address Richard's concerns. That said I think some of these issues may still be valid, but IANAL.
The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
Problem 1: What is it good for?
Problem 3: What does Plan 9 offer that would make me, or you, want to spend time installing and learning it?
These seem to be the biggest "issues" you propose, which you fully address in your other problem: Problem 2: It is a research tool, and may never be more than that.
Many people seem to forget that there are many many many OSs out there that aren't flavors of *nix or Windows which are used for research purposes. There are quite a few which would make great multi-purpose systems if given the proper attention (Nemesis comes to mind) but never become as such because their features are integrated into other systems. But the need for development into other types of kernel structures, memory management, et al, is what keeps the OS world alive.
Contrary to popular belief, Linux can't do everything.
The reasons aren't obvious. I've seen this myth before, notably from Microsoft employees. The idea that you can be "infected" by simply looking at GPLd code is nonsense.
Indeed you are correct. Imagine it like this. I write books for a living. I read a detective novel. Therefore I am banned from writing a detective novel. .. Erm, I don't think so.
Ironically, proprietary code is generally far more "infectious". I work on Wine - if I were to have seen the Windows code, I would be immediately banned from working on it, indeed, probably I'd be banned from working on most GPLd code.
While the Wine developers might or might not do this, there would be nothing illegal about working on Wine, provided you didn't do the obvious things like cutting and pasting large chunks of code.
Rich.
libguestfs - tools for accessing and modifying virtual machine disk images
Bad stuff? About Unix? Did you forget which forum you're posting to? This is /. after all!
-Ben
RMS has on many occassions been a complete idiot and anyone who would have looked into the new license or even the freeking headline, would have seen that the issue of it being truly open is in fact true.
OpenSource != FreeSoftware, but OpenSource does bring more freedom, odd isn't it?
GNU is old school ... OSI is new school ... lets get together and change our collective phiolosophies.
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
Problem 2: It is a research tool, and may never be more than that. Chances are, any truly compelling features in Plan 9 will soon find their way into Linux and even MS Windows.
This is exactly the reason why projects like Plan9 are a good thing. If everyone concentrated on developing current technologies, the rate of innovation would drop dramatically. Will plan9 ever become a widely used, vastly supported operating system? Probably not, but the beauty of open source is that the advancements made by researching and developing a new way of doing things in one project can be applied to other, more prominently used projects.
Very well trolled. Especially the bit about "hair" and "head and shoulders".
And you managed to fit in the word "paradigm", too.
Don't talk about compatable. GPL isn't compatable with BSD license, so we can't use your guy's code. You guys can take all you want, but we can't take. I like how GPL is "free".
Please.
First, which part of "this will contribute to Linux" didn't you understand? Linux has absolutely nothing to do with the FreeBSD license, so spreading your divisive nonsense in this thread is woefully off-topic.
Second, the FreeBSD license is perfectly compatible with the GPL. It is also compatible with Microsoft's proprietary license, not to mention anyone elses. The fact that the GPL isn't compatible with FreeBSD (meaning you can't take GPLed code and incorporate it into FreeBSD-licensed code), and the fact that Microsoft's proprietary license is likewise incompatible, is entirely irrelevant.
Indeed, that one-way compatability was a deliberate decision made by the FreeBSD folks...who valued the developer's freedom to incorporate their hard work into proprietary products over the protection of the freedom of future developers and users. Which is a perfectly legitimate stance to take, though it just so happens to be in disagreement with the decision by the GPL folks to protect their users and derivative developers freedoms above even their own.
It is extraordinarilly disingenuous to criticize one free licenses philosophy and imply it to somehow be improper, when the very same license has led to FreeBSD code being included in products which protect neither the developers, nor the users freedom, such as Microsoft's usage of the FreeBSD network stack. Before lambasting the thousands of volunteers who have contributed millions of man hours for FREE, to enhance your FREEDOM, merely because you disagree with the aspects of freedom they choose to emphesize over the ones you would emphesize (if any, which I find questionable in this particular troll), perhaps you would like to address the use of FREE code in products that strip all said FREEDOMs away? Until you justify lambasting the 1-way compatability between two free licenses while ignorning the same 1-way compatability between FreeBSD and virtually every proprietary license, your entire argument devolves to hypocritical grandstanding, misinformation, and spin.
The GPL is free. FreeBSD is free. In different ways, with different protections, different emphesises on different aspects of freedom, and with different consiquences. Most of us who use FreeBSD are perfectly comfortable with this, and understand the differences that are part of the diversity of our community. Most of us who use GNU/Linux are likewise understanding and appreciative of both schools of thought, and can recognize the advantages and limitations of both.
It is only the few zealots on either side, and much more commonly divisive trolls like yourself, for whome this concept poses such difficulty.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy