Slashdot Mirror


OpenSolaris Code Released

njcoder writes "C|net's news.com.com has reported that Sun Microsystems is releasing parts of the OpenSolaris code today licensed under the OSI-approved CDDL . The release consistes of over 5 million lines of code for the base system OS/Net (kernel and networking). OpenSolaris is based on Solaris 10, the current version of Sun's Unix Operating System. Back in January, Sun released the code for DTrace, a dynamic tracing tool for analyzing and debugging kernel and userland events. DTrace is one of the big features in Solaris 10. Some other highlights include the GRUB bootloader, SMF (Service Management Facility) which replaces init.d scripts, it starts up processes in parallel for faster boots (7 second boot on a dual opteron workstation I think that was the setup) as well as providing features for automatically restarting. OpenSolaris provides support for x86/x86-64 processors as well as Sparc. The Blastware guys are working on Polaris which is an OpenSolaris port to PowerPC. Sun has been working on opening Solaris for over a year now. The OpenSolaris project started with a pilot group of Sun and non-Sun users. During the pilot program a lot of info including screenshots could be found on various OpenSolaris member blogs. (My favorite is Ben Rockwood's blog). Teamware is the source code management system Sun uses for Solaris and OpenSolaris. Which was designed by Larry McVoy (now of BitKeeper) while he was at sun. No word yet on if Teamware will be available for OpenSolaris developers or not. Sun also uses CollabNet for it's Open Source project websites so that might be a possibility as well."

57 of 362 comments (clear)

  1. Rock on! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Interesting
    YES! This completely rocks! Check it out:



    Combined with an Open Source/Forkable license, what more could a Solaris Geek want? Get out the party hats people, because this has got to be THE most awesome thing Sun has ever done!

    (I'm excited, can you tell? *Happy Dance* *Happy Dance*) :-P

    Now for the bad news. Sun has taken the tack of encouraging users to build their own system. That is a good thing. Unfortuntely, all builds require a system to bootstrap the build. At the moment, the only option is Solaris Community Edition, a non-Torrented download. (Boo!) That being said, I don't think we'll have to wait too long for the OSS community to fix that little issue. :-D
    1. Re:Rock on! by njcoder · · Score: 2, Informative

      Also check out Jim Grisanzio's blog. It explains a bit about what's been going on with the pilot program.

    2. Re:Rock on! by m50d · · Score: 2, Funny

      Proper CD recording support because the makers understand the need for backwards compatibility, and don't go around breaking APIs just because they feel like it.

      --
      I am trolling
    3. Re:Rock on! by grahamlee · · Score: 2, Informative
      Unfortuntely, all builds require a system to bootstrap the build. At the moment, the only option is Solaris Community Edition, a non-Torrented download. (Boo!) That being said, I don't think we'll have to wait too long for the OSS community to fix that little issue.

      Sadly, that might not necessarily be the case - OpenDarwin has been around for five years and you still need a Darwin system [including some non-free tools] to bootstrap the build. But as Solaris Express is free as in non-costworthy, I don't see any problem with downloading SE to bootstrap an OpenSlowlaris kernel build. Me, I'm still using Solaris 2,7, and 8 ;-)

    4. Re:Rock on! by 11223 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not true. OpenDarwin images build from source under an OpenDarwin image, with only free tools.

    5. Re:Rock on! by elmegil · · Score: 3, Insightful
      So, tell me exactly which features are in Linux/FreeBSD/etc that I don't have or can't get for Solaris? Assertion that my statement is not true doesn't prove a damn thing.

      Does Solaris want to be the hacker's desktop OS? I really doubt it. Does Solaris want to be an OSS player in the data center? Absolutely. And for data center features, Solaris does very well against the competitors. If you think Sun's OSS strategy is to get joe hacker to run his OS, of course you're going to be disappointed, because you just don't get it yourself.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    6. Re:Rock on! by bankman · · Score: 2, Funny
      Proper CD recording support because the makers understand the need for backwards compatibility, and don't go around breaking APIs just because they feel like it.

      Joerg Schilling, is that you?

      --
      I feel so sig.
    7. Re:Rock on! by kbmccarty · · Score: 4, Funny

      Now for the bad news. Sun has taken the tack of encouraging users to build their own system.

      Countdown to Debian GNU/Solaris in T minus 10... 9...

      --
      - Kevin B. McCarty
  2. let the driver flood gates open! by emptybody · · Score: 4, Interesting

    now maybe we will see some driver development for all the cool hardware that is out there?

    --
    comment directly in my journal
    1. Re:let the driver flood gates open! by zzqzzq_zzq · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When things like the 'dad' & 'uata' (IDE drivers), and 'todsg' drivers are still in the closed source tarballs, I'm not hopeful for the 'open'ness of 'opensolaris' (Come on, they can't release drivers for their own hardware clocks?! (todsg))

    2. Re:let the driver flood gates open! by Nerant · · Score: 3, Informative

      Believe it or not, there are numerous legal issues that Sun has to work through in order to ensure code that is open sourced doesn't get anyone in trouble.

      Be patient. They're working on it. Or would you rather they open source some code they don't have the right to, and get people who see that code into trouble?

      There is still alot of work to be done, but it is a huge first step.

      For more, take a look at the roadmap at

      http://opensolaris.org/os/about/roadmap/

      --
      Be kind. There are too many mean people out there already.
  3. But, does it run Linux? by hey · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well, does it?

  4. opensolaris is a trap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    this code is a trap to scuttle linux development. sun will be looking to sue coders who they feel copy concepts and code from opensolaris into gpl'd codebases. do not look at the opensolaris code is you are a linux coder or code in gpl'd software. protect yourself and your code.

  5. Zfs? by astrashe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is zfs included?

    1. Re:Zfs? by pedantic+bore · · Score: 4, Informative
      According to the feature list (http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/documenta tion/opensolaris_guide/) ZFS is not part of the current release.

      Justing reading the stuff that is released, however, is a joy.

      --
      Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    2. Re:Zfs? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hell, I'm running Solaris 10 on an old 433 MHz Pentium 2 and it does just great, Rock-solid and surprisingly fast, given the hardware.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  6. I'm unfamiliar by udderly · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Since I'm mostly unfamiliar with Solaris, what are the main advantages it has over Linux, BSD and Windows? Just curious.

    1. Re:I'm unfamiliar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      what are the main advantages it has over Linux, BSD and Windows?

      Well Solaris is +3 vs. undead, while Linux, BSD and Windows are: +1 icy blast, +2 flaming and -4 cursed respectively.

    2. Re:I'm unfamiliar by ahl_at_sun · · Score: 5, Informative

      That answer depends on who you are. If you're a system administrator Predictive Self-Healing is going to raise the reliability of your systems and make management scads easier; SMF makes configuring the system a snap and lets you identify problems quickly and easily; Zones lets you partition the system without the management overhead of a bazillion OS instances; DTrace lets you understand everything that's happening on your system -- and who's responsible for the latest crap-up; Solaris Process Rights improve security and administrative overhead by splitting up the traditional binary notion of the super user. If you're a developer, you'll love DTrace -- I can't imagine developing with out it; the p-tools, truss(1) and mdb(1) are also great. If you're an end-user, well, Solaris's gnome sucks as much as anyone's gnome -- go use Mac OS.

    3. Re:I'm unfamiliar by rubycodez · · Score: 3, Informative

      For Linux and FreeBSD and common packages/ports on opteron and ultrasparc there's still 64 bit cleanliness issues, and there's BSD issues running on Ultrasparc III and above chips (as in, can't do it). FreeBSD is still trying to implement fine grained SMP spinlocks which don't sieze up under heavy load & to get fine grained locks into tcp stack. Solaris builds backward compatibiity into libraries that Linux dosen't have, which is why when installing proprietary app binaries there's all kinds of neat patching and relinking that needs to be done (for example, installing Oracle on Sun is a breeze, but on Linux takes some care as to java and various library versions, and for another example enterprise SAN software such as veritas or Hitachi drivers only works with certain kernels). Solaris has the definitave and latest/greatest versions many services such as RPC and NFS (linux has some issues there)

    4. Re:I'm unfamiliar by bdgregg · · Score: 4, Informative
      Probably the most clear and undenyable feature that is unique to OpenSolaris/Solaris is DTrace.

      DTrace lets us examine just about anything, with minimal impact on the system. It's way cool, and other OSes have nothing that is close (for details covering the Linux Trace Toolkit (LTT), DProbes, K42 and Kerninst see the USENIX paper.

      DTrace solves disk I/O by PID, network activity by PID, elapsed and on-cpu times for syscalls, libcalls and user funcs, and much more.

      DTrace is great if you are a programmer with a little kernel knowledge, but if not you may find the DTraceToolkit helpful - it is a collection of ready-to-roll scripts.

      For a list of many OpenSolaris features with screenshots, see the OpenSolaris Guide.

    5. Re:I'm unfamiliar by flaming-opus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      you just said mdb = great. Now I know you're just making it up. Mdb is just about useless when the core file is generated on a system other than the one you're debugging with. (always the case if the binary crashes at a customer site, rather than the test-lab) We just went through a lot of effort to convert from using sun CC to compiling with gcc, not because gcc produces better code, but so we could get the right symbols for using gdb.

      mdb is the biggest pain in the world; gdb isn't perfect, but it's a lot simpler than mdb.

    6. Re:I'm unfamiliar by ahl_at_sun · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes! That was true, but not as of Solaris 10. The reason core files needed to be on the same machine that produced them was because they didn't include all the necessary information. In particular, they didn't include read-only data. Their genesis was around debugging on a given machine and in that case, dumping the read-only sections is kind of pointless. This was a frustration that affected every application developer who cared about post-mortem analysis; we in Solaris really care about debugging from first failure.

      In Solaris 10, I did some work to make the content of core files adjustable and added text (aka code) to the default. Now when you get a core file, you can debug it on any other system regardless of the patch level, libraries installed or the version of your application that was running. Using coreadm(1M) you can adjust the content to, say, add the symbol table to the core dump or omit the gigantic ISM segment that you don't care about for.

      So, yes, mdb(1) had some limitations in the past -- we've tried to address them in Solaris 10. If you have other issues preventing you from using mdb(1), post a comment on the OpenSolaris site.

      I thought I was going to have to find a shill to ask that question... "Sir, we've never met before, have we?"

  7. Solaris can't compete by jhfry · · Score: 5, Funny

    Solaris doesn't stand a chance against *BSD or Linux... their logo sucks! Come on... seriously... what's more cuter than a Penguin or a Daemon?

    --
    Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
    1. Re:Solaris can't compete by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Come on... seriously... what's more cuter than a Penguin or a Daemon?

      A Sun with a smiley face?

    2. Re:Solaris can't compete by jb.hl.com · · Score: 2, Funny

      Doesn't matter if it's cute...the point is that both Tux and the daemon will both get roasted by the sun :)

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
  8. so.. by brickballs · · Score: 4, Funny
    automatically restarting

    windows automaticay restarts for me all the time. I get a quick flash of blue and then bam! restart.

    --
    "What does slashdotting mean?"
    "You've never heard of slashdot?"
    "I know it makes websites not work."
  9. Re:Vaporware no more! by njcoder · · Score: 4, Funny

    You can search the source code online. I did a search for fuck, shit and a couple of other words. Within 5,000,000 lines of code no hits for fuck and only 1 for shit. I think I understand why it took them so long to get the code ready :)

  10. Persona non-grata. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Teamware is the source code management system Sun uses for Solaris and OpenSolaris. Which was designed by Larry McVoy (now of BitKeeper) while he was at sun. No word yet on if Teamware will be available for OpenSolaris developers or not."

    Remember folks. You hate Larry.

  11. The real question is does it run on Xen? by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If it runs on Xen, then it can run in parellel with Linux. That would be a good way for code to move one way or another.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  12. Re:Vaporware no more! by mogrify · · Score: 3, Informative

    heh... bet that gets taken out right quick. http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/usr/src/cmd /volmgt/vold/dev_rmscsi.c thanks for the tip.

    --
    perl -e 'foreach(values %SIG){$_="IGNORE";}while(){}'
  13. For those of us who don't like torrents by m50d · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/get.jsp. Requires registration though.

    --
    I am trolling
  14. openoffice... by torrents · · Score: 3, Insightful

    if this project is half as successful for sun as openoffice is i'm sure they'll be happy they decided to open it...

    --
    Get your torrents...
  15. Great. by Telastyn · · Score: 3, Funny

    Perfect. An open source OS backed by a well known name. The perfect stepping stone to get hesitant PHBs to accept an open source OS without a big company behind it into their shops.

  16. SMF vs InitNG? by yerdaddie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm curious about how the SMF boot parallelization code stacks up against the InitNG project, which does the same for Linux. Anyone had experience with both?

  17. Q: does it run on Xen? A: Not yet but it will by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 4, Informative

    Some Sun guys are doing a port to Xen. This'll give you near-native performance for Solaris apps, along with the comprehensive device support provided by a Linux (or NetBSD) "domain 0" (host virtual machine).

    See http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/tpm/20050510#the_ xen_summit (it seems to be down right now).

  18. Apps Here! Get Your Apps Here! by Zemplar · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ckeck out Blastwave.org http://www.blastwave.org/ for some torrents, apps, guides, and other goodies.

    Additionally, SunFreeware http://www.sunfreeware.com/ is another great site for getting applications.

  19. In another news today by guardiangod · · Score: 2, Funny

    Spokeman from SCO annonced today that they are currently closely examining Solaris source code for any "infringing" SCO's Linux code.

    When asked about the legitmacy of the action, however- "This IS the property of SCO, that's final...no we don't have proof for that, but we are working on that."

  20. maybe PJ can stop with the Sun conspiracy theories by willdenniss · · Score: 2, Funny

    I agree. I think this is pretty good proof of Sun's good intentions. Hopefully Groklaw's PJ can stop with the Sun conspiracy theories now.

    Will.

  21. Can either an "Editor" or the Poster please RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "7 second boot on a dual opteron workstation I think that was the setup"

    You don't have to think, just RTFA, where you can see that it was a single AMD64 setup.
    Still, I guess that would be too much trouble for the simple gain of being correct ?

  22. Re:Parallel boot scripts by Chyeld · · Score: 3, Interesting
    One. Big one comes to mind.

    Don't know about the rest.

  23. Is the monopoly finally being smashed? by CyricZ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I believe we are seeing the monopoly finally begin smashed to pieces. Besides the Linux and *BSD alternatives, we now have open-source x86 Solaris at our disposal, as well as the upcoming release of yellowTAB Zeta (based on BeOS). And with Mac OS X coming to the x86, things may really start to get interested. Just as people thought the x86 PC operating system market would start to stagnate, we have all sorts of innovation coming our way!

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  24. Re:Parallel boot scripts by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Funny

    Are there parallel boot scripts made for other distro's? Fedora or Red Hat or Slackware etc...

    I don't know.

    --- If you found this answer helpful, click HERE.

    --- If not click HERE.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  25. It is MS and Sun vs. Linux by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Insightful

    MS moved to "Shared Source" sometime ago. It was done in hopes that Linux coders would borrow from MS. So far, it has not happened.

    But this has potential to do what MS could not. Solaris is at least respected by the development world. This is simply another trap being laid by Sun and MS against Linux.

    What is funny is how little ppl seem to remember from just 7 years ago. Sun actually ported to X86 once before AND "opened" their source code. Then when they thought that things were going well, they dropped it. If Sun ever feels like things are going in their favor, it is almost certain that they will do it again.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:It is MS and Sun vs. Linux by njcoder · · Score: 2, Informative
      "But this has potential to do what MS could not. Solaris is at least respected by the development world. This is simply another trap being laid by Sun and MS against Linux."

      Try reading the CDDL FAQ before you start trolling.

      Can code licensed under the CDDL be combined with code licensed under other open source licenses?

      CDDL is file-based; that means that files licensed under the CDDL can be combined with files licensed under other licenses, whether open source or proprietary. However, other licenses may have different restrictions which may prevent such combination; be sure to read and recognize those.

      So how can they "trap" people when the code is released under and OSI approved license?

      "What is funny is how little ppl seem to remember from just 7 years ago. Sun actually ported to X86 once before AND "opened" their source code. Then when they thought that things were going well, they dropped it. If Sun ever feels like things are going in their favor, it is almost certain that they will do it again."

      Sun has had an x86 port for a long long time. They dropped it around the time they bought Cobalt. Probably because Cobalt and Solaris x86 competed for some of the same market. The Solaris x86 community rallied together and got Sun to bring it back. I'm sure that the appliance market wasn't panning out helped too. But now Sun is really pushing forward with Opterons. Some details were leaked on the new Galaxy line of Opterons coming out. Should be good stuff. And as for dropping it, well it's open source now. It's going to be out there for ever.

    2. Re:It is MS and Sun vs. Linux by starfishsystems · · Score: 3, Interesting
      This is simply another trap being laid by Sun and MS against Linux.

      It may be. I know a very bright Microsoft zealot who thinks it is, and couldn't be more delighted at the prospect.

      I don't think it is, myself. For one thing, the internal cultures of these two organizations, and the personalities they attract to senior positions, could not be more different. You just have to look at their past conduct to see this. Microsoft does lay traps, systematically, all the time. Sun is a corporate player too, thus in the game for profit, but its strategies are much more symbiotic in their essential character.

      When Sun puts someone on a standards committee, it's to make the standard more valuable for everyone, on the express theory that it's better to share a growing market than have all of a stagnant one. When Microsoft puts someone on the same committee, it's to "embrace and extend" the standard so as to exclude competition, and the expressed goal is to eliminate all competition.

      Another thing worth remembering is that an organization as big as Sun has substantial internal struggles from time to time. Such was the case with Solaris on X86. The project took off energetically at first, but it was a risky venture which happened to fall out of political favor just at the point when driver support was becoming most critical. The result was not a strategic withdrawl, it was a conspicuous fumble which cost Sun a lot of internal morale, hurt its reputation, and lost it a golden opportunity whose extent has only become more apparent in recent years.

      So yes, it could all happen again, but not because of some nefarious strategy on the part of Sun Microsystems. Sun does not have a history of executing that way.

      --
      Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
    3. Re:It is MS and Sun vs. Linux by justins · · Score: 4, Interesting
      What is funny is how little ppl seem to remember from just 7 years ago. Sun actually ported to X86 once before AND "opened" their source code. Then when they thought that things were going well, they dropped it. If Sun ever feels like things are going in their favor, it is almost certain that they will do it again.

      I won't be the only one, but I just thought I'd point out that the license they are using this time around is quite different, and they literally cannot take away your right to use the code once you've got it. You might read the (OSI-approved) license before spouting off, although I know that is asking a lot.

      http://www.opensolaris.org/os/licensing/
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    4. Re:It is MS and Sun vs. Linux by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They are not as different as you think. I have worked at IBM and HP and have seen first-hand how Sun does things. Most of the traps that they have laid in the past have been in sales for other companies (IBM/HP being just 2 of many ).

      As it is, McNeally's collaboration with MS makes me very edgy. Consider how much McNeally hates Gates and MS. It does not make sense for them to work together.

      I have some friends who work for Sun and some others that work for MS (one who is on the linux tiger team - when he could talk that was interesting info ). One of my poker buddies is one of Sun's kernel guy. When I listen to him, then Sun is above board and simply competing. But every time we get into a discussion about Sun vs. the industry, he has been 100% wrong. Every time. Best example was the Solaris x86 release. Once Sun thought they were doing great, then they cut the project. But of course, a developer is not privy to sales and management choices.

      One of the MS guys claims that this is a long term trap. In particular, both MS's and Sun's license allows the use of the patents in the files (not code) for the system use. If anybody "borrows" the code, then they are no longer protected. Both companies are supposedly hopeful that the Linux world will pick up from either (interestingly, MS no longer thinks that it will come from their stuff, so Shared source will probably die or be severely limited). I no longer code on Solaris just due to my not trusting Sun's motives. Sad, because like any Unix, I like it.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re:It is MS and Sun vs. Linux by eviltypeguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One of the MS guys claims that this is a long term trap. In particular, both MS's and Sun's license allows the use of the patents in the files (not code) for the system use. If anybody "borrows" the code, then they are no longer protected. Both companies are supposedly hopeful that the Linux world will pick up from either (interestingly, MS no longer thinks that it will come from their stuff, so Shared source will probably die or be severely limited). I no longer code on Solaris just due to my not trusting Sun's motives. Sad, because like any Unix, I like it.

      Also incorrect. If someone "borrows" the code, as long as they comply with the terms of the CDDDL, they have the right to any patents that were granted by that license. Which in this case are any patents that SUN owns.

  26. Re:Vaporware no more! by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 2, Informative

    Though it won't satisfy those of us who have been shouting "Vapourlicense!"

    --
    - These characters were randomly selected.
  27. Sun Compiler License by Noksagt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When will the Sun compiler be released under the CDDL? Currently, Sun Studio is under a different license.

  28. Re:Finally! by CapnGrunge · · Score: 2, Informative

    Slackware has no init.d either, you get rc.S for single user, rc.M for multiuser and rc.4 for graphical login.

    --
    I see 57005 people
  29. Re:Parallel boot scripts by chegosaurus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They aren't exactly parallel boot scripts. It's a part of something called the Service Management Facility. You write XML manifests describing how services should be started, stopped, restarted, refreshed, and what the SMF should do in the event of failure events. It intruduces the concept of dependencies between services, and makes a lot of things more coherent and logical. It also means you have to learn a lot of new stuff.

    The SMF has a concept of milestones, which groups of scripts "belong" to. This is not unlike the principle of run levels, and when moving between milestones the SMF can fire off a whole bunch of services in parallel. It usually does this through scripts akin to the old init scripts, but doesn't have to.

    That's not a very good description, but it might give someone who can't be bothered to RTFM some idea of one of the big new features.

    Solaris 10 is great. IMHO there's no Unix (or clone) to touch it. That's just my opinion, and I CAN NOT be bothered to argue about it, so don't start!

  30. Re:Finally! by elmegil · · Score: 4, Interesting
    rc.d? I see those on my Solaris system too. Don't you mean "rc.boot" and "rc.local"?? The "init.d" method has a master that runs subscripts from rc*.d directories too, so I fail to see how that's any different.

    SMF is going to be a head check for a lot of people who LIKE init.d/rc.d (though backward compatability with that has been retained so far). Myself, I like the fact that it's more robust and faster, and I don't like the fact that it's managed with a handful of different commands depending on what you want to do. And I'm not terribly thrilled that the backend is XML, but you'll have that.

    --
    7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
  31. Re:Vaporware no more! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Linux is written in C. When you require a nonlocal exit from a loop without dealing with the overhead of a function or even sentinel variable checks (I usually use "bail"), goto is just the thing. Nothing wrong with forward goto's. Backward gotos to "redo" a loop are kind of icky, but also not wrong.

    When "GOTO Considered Harmful" was written, it was THE flow-control structure. Only unthinking idiots actually believe it is never Ever EVER to be used.

    Using goto in C++ is an almost universally bad idea if it ever crosses blocks though. Destructors don't get called. Technical reasons like that usually have little to do with "I'm such an engineer, I know goto sucks" attitude.

  32. Re:Vaporware no more! by snorklewacker · · Score: 2, Funny

    > specifically, I wanted to know if the GNU folks had to have GNU in the license name. You can guess what the response was...

    Flames like "the G stands for General" followed by colorful aspersions on your intelligence?

    --
    I am no longer wasting my time with slashdot
  33. Larry McVoy did NOT design Teamware by NatteringNabob · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Larry McVoy designed a prototype called 'NSE Lite' which was based on concepts developed by Eric Schmidt and Bunker Lampson which were incorporated into NSE which was built by a host of people including, but not limited to, Jon Fieber, Marty Honda, Ethan Adams, Terry Miller, David Hendricks, and Jill Foley. Larry McVoy had absolutely nothig to do with NSE or the core concepts of copy-modify-merge except for being an unhappy NSE customer. Glenn Skinner is listed as the patent author for 'smoosh' which is the central technology to both NSE-lite and Teamware. Larry claims that he is co-inventor. I don't know, I was in the NSE group, Larry was in the OS group at the time. Teamware itself was designed and implemented by Ethan Adams, Terry Miller, Jill Foley, Mark Sabiers, Lewie Knapp, Josh Sirota and Mitchell Nguyen. Larry's primary contribution was to complain a lot. Larry is a bright guy, but he didn't design Teamware anymore than Bill Joy designed Unix. He deserves a tremendous amount of credit for sucessfully productizing the technologies invented by the NSE team (and a lot of others) something that Sun, with substantially more resources, was unable to do, but it is an extreme stretch to call Larry the designer of Teamware (even though if Larry thinks so).