Slashdot Mirror
Announcing WiFiBSD
flynn_nrg writes "WifiBSD is a minimalistic version of FreeBSD based on the 5.x branch. WifiBSD is aimed for wireless routers running on embedded devices such as boards from soekris.com. In addition to the wi driver WifiBSD includes support for Atheros's 802.11b/g and 802.11a/b/g Wireless LAN Chipsets. The latest version of WifiBSD can be found here."
While I'm glad to see BSD becoming more prominent and giving Linux some competition, I'm a little worried about something; the ongoing attempt to make BSD and Linux "all things to all people". In other words, to put these OS's on everything from small embedded chips in cell phones, to huge enterprise class server setups. I think this approach only creates more bloat in an OS.
Granted, you can take the source code, modify it heavily for your purpose (embedded routers in this case), and it might bear little resemblance to the parent OS. But is it still BSD or Linux then? How far can you alter it before it becomes a radical offshoot, and in truth, a different OS?
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
The project is based on minibsd, which is based on freebsd.
It isn't a lie if you belive it.
...and whilst that was a nice informative article, it was also noticeably linux specific (of course, you couldn't be trolling - not with a closing line like that). /., I think a few BSD targetted articles on configuring WAPs
This being the BSD area of
might be more apt.
That said, this WiFiBSD thing looks like a nice little development. Could well come in handy.
|>
Here be Dragons
Note the author:
Peter Seebach
This is the same Seebach who works (worked?) for BSDi and WindRiver, is a committer on NetBSD.
Now pimp'n linux.
If this works great, than WiFi vendors don't owe the community a cent.
BSD worked great for Apple. And guess what? They're giving back to the community! I just guess it goes to show that the public won't act like thieves when you don't treat them like thieves.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Running a BSD based wireless router off a floppy has been possible with PicoBSD for years. I fail to see how WiFiBSD accomplishes anything, aside from distributing the floppy image, which has already been done by theWall
http://astutehosting.com/
Thus the WiFi vendor does not adopt linux, and no one benefits because of the restrictiveness of the GPL.
On the other hand, that same WiFi vendor adopts BSD since it can without any negative repercussions. Although it is not legally compelled to disclose its modification, it still makes good business sense for the vendor to support the BSD community since their products are based on it. It is thus likely for them to make some contribution, the extent depending on the vendor's management. In any event, the BSD community has benefitted.
In addition, the consumers of that vendor's product benefit. The savings of the vendor over producing something inhouse or purchasing from a 3rd party can be passed on to consumers. As well, the consumers receive a quality product based on tried and true BSD.
Thus, plenty of good things come from the vendor's adoption of BSD. Nothing good results when the vendor simply decides not to use linux.
http://astutehosting.com/
Background: http://www.wirelessleiden.nl/wcl/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/ NodeFactory
Code (in public subversion):g /factory/trunk/install/install.sh
g /factory/trunk/
http://wleiden.webweaving.org:8080/svn/node-confi
http://wleiden.webweaving.org:8080/svn/node-confi
Machines using the code: http://www.wirelessleiden.nl/wcl/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/ NodeMap
Though this one is a bit more fully fledged; as it also includes SNMP management and OSPF routing.
Dw.
If this works great, than WiFi vendors don't owe the community a cent.
BSD vs. GPL issues aside, what does WiFiBSD have to do with WiFi vendors? I don't think anyone has hinted that vendors are necessarily going to start using WiFiBSD in their products, so what gives? Besides, the functions of most commercial WiFi products can be duplicated and done much better with free software, so who says vendors of these embedded products would even have anything worthwhile that we would want given back to the community?
-- Never hit a man with glasses. Hit him with a baseball bat.
This is great I cant wait to set up a BSD Wireless AP do you think that any vendors will get on and use BSD in Wireless AP
Linux is like living in a teepee. No Windows, no Gates, Apache in house.
It hurts 'n' stuff.
By Chinese Karma Whore, Version 1.0
Everyone knows about BSD's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of BSD, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save Linux from a similarly grisly fate.
Let's not be overly morbid and give BSD credit for its early successes. In the 1970s, Ken Thompson and Bill Joy both made significant contributions to the computing world on the BSD platform. In the 80s, DARPA saw BSD as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the 4.1BSD product, gave the BSD company a 2 year contract.
These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar BSD's progress. In 1992, AT&T filed suit against Berkeley Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While AT&T and Berkeley Software lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various BSD distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1995, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the NetBSD project, formed his own rival distribution, OpenBSD, as the result of a quarrel that he documents on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of IPF from the OpenBSD distribution.
As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, BSD's codebase became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each BSD distribution make code sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT found BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing." Even BSD's acclaimed TCP/IP stack has lagged behind, according to this study.
Problems with BSD's codebase were compounded by fundamental flaws in the BSD design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, rapid, decentralized development models are inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development. BSD developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that centralized models lead to 'cleaner code.' Don't believe their hype - BSD's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that BSD managed to make were nullified by the BSD license, which allows corporations and coders alike to reap profits without reciprocating the goodwill of open-source. Fortunately, Linux is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL.
The failure of BSD culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the FreeBSD core team. They both believed that FreeBSD had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, BSD had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As Linux gains market share and as BSD sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to BSD's demise.
Hopefully this will get taken up by the others, OpenBSD and NetBSD. As far as I know, 802.11a/g are still a glimmer there. And I hope that the driver does not include a proprietary binary.
All that depends on the vendor and how open-minded he is. We were lucky to find one who is already building AP's with linux-powered guts and who is very interested in our project. Cross your fingers, maybe this could lead to something good. :)
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major marketing surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dilettante dabblers. If truth, for all practical purposes *BSD is already dead. It is a dead man walking.
Fact: *BSD is dying
No problemo, sport.
yo lazy fuck, you didnt even bother to paste the whole thing.
What is worse than a Troll? A Lazy Troll.