Slashdot Mirror
NetBSD Packages Collection No Longer Frozen
jschauma writes "As many users will probably have noticed by the increase in recent pkgsrc
commits, the NetBSD
Packages Collection freeze is now officially over.
Starting October
6th, 2003 and lasting almost two months, the NetBSD Packages
team concentrated upon stabilizing the over 4,000
software packages and the pkgsrc
infrastructure to prepare for a stable pkgsrc branch. During that time, the
number of broken packages during a i386 bulk build was brought down to a mere
15, and a large number of PRs was closed.
A new branch with the tag ``pkgsrc-2003Q4'' was created, allowing our users to
maintain a highly stabilized third-party software package managment
environment, as only pullups of significant importance (such as security
issues) are applied to this branch."
You can compile for other cpus and even other CPU architectures on one machine for use on another.
I belive the word 'sarcasm' plays a role in my original post.
A nice cake is waiting for you
Oooo! What kind of cake?
It's nice to see my antics don't go unnoticed ;)
I honestly don't see how this was modded Informative...
This is the same GPL vs BSD flamewar that has been going on for a while now. It's definatly NOT informative.
The BSDs choose to use a BSD style liscence because they don't care about having a huge market share. They just want very good software EVERYWHERE. There is little hope in hiding the fact that nearly EVERY OS uses BSD code somewhere (usually in the network stack).
BSD style liscences are GREAT for standards, because then any operating system that wants to implement that standard can just copy and paste the source. It doesn't matter whether it's open or closed source.
Linux trolls just have this screwy view on the real world. GPL is great for the open source community, but that's it! BSD is great for the computer industy as a whole. To be honest, I don't care what operating system I use, as long as it get's the job done. It just so happens that right now, linux (on the desktop) get's the job done better than anything else.
You really need to get your head out of the corporate mindset, and realize that you don't have to turn a profit to be successful.
DISCLAIMER: This isn't a flame, trust me. The views and ideas expressed here are intended to open the mind of a GPL whore. Mod this down if you think it's nessisary.
Not Free(as in beer). Free(as in "I'm free to beat you over the head for being a dumbass")
OK let me try to figure this out. If you have a patch for the Linux kernel which enhances functionality or fixes bugs then you ask for it to be integerated into the official source. Similarily if you have a patch for any component of the the main three BSD operating systems then you ask for it to be integerated. In both scenarios if the patch is determined to be of good quality and safe then it is accepted. So just how is the BSD development process any less "open"?
Now, Apache uses a BSD style license but they have an open development model which allows them to take advantage of a very large developer pool in order to stay ahead of their competition. In fact although proprietary versions of Apache exist which perform better than the official releases, SGI has put out some open source patches which generate even larger performance boosts. This is the reason why they have such a strong showing in terms of market share.
And now suddenly your opinion of the BSD license changes. Apache is released with a BSD license but yet it isn't inferior to you eventhough commercial versions of it exist. How convenient. Apple "steals" BSD code and yet they contribute back too... who would've thunk it?
I don't think that there is enough widespread support for BSD to save the operating system.
Nice subtle trolling. What exactly does it need to be saved from? BSD has been around longer than Linux and I don't see it's development being affected. Thank you please don't come again.