Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

*BSD News

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the big-batch-o-bsd dept.

Woody writes "There is tons of stuff happening on the BSD front. The NetBSD Foundation is scheduled to release version 1.4 of their multi-platform OS tomorrow, May 12. The OpenBSD group is scheduled to release version 2.5 of their super-secure multi-platform OS on May 19. Finally, those boys over at FreeBSD are scheduled to release version 3.2 of their i386 optimized OS on or around May 15. Lots of rumblings in the BSD world! "

2 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I want to try BSD .. but which one? by Void · · Score: 5

    Basicly, the difference is this:

    - FreeBSD is the fastest (you can argue about this, but it is that way 85% of the time), and has better Hard and Software support (running WordPerfect or Doom or Quake (even the beta 3) for Linux is no prob ...

    - NetBSD runs on a lot of different platforms

    - OpenBSD has more encryption/security options ...

    I would recommend FreeBSD in your case ...

  2. Re:The absence of the GPL by JoeBuck · · Score: 3
    This is at least the second time Daemon News has resorted to red-baiting. Just for fun, I'll do a bit of reversing here.

    I fully respect and honor people who find the BSD license preferable to the GPL, or who object to the GPL because they think its retrictions are unnecessary. I have no use for jerks who argue against it on the basis that it is "communist", especially from proponents of the BSD license.

    After all, the BSD license is more communist in the sense of Marx than the GPL. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." If you tell me I should use the BSD, you're saying that I should contribute work to you to do whatever you want to do with, because I have the ability and you have the need.

    The GPL is more market-oriented. The author who uses the GPL gives software to other developers to make derivative works from only if the other developers are willing to give back their changes. Many developers who use the GPL also sell proprietary software; in some cases (e.g. Aladdin Software, makers of Ghostscript) they use dual licensing: folks who don't like the GPL restrictions can pay $$$ to get other terms.

    As Russ Nelson has said, the reason he uses the GPL is "When I write commercial software I want to get paid." Those who claim that developers must use BSD-like terms when they write free software are saying that they must give up their work without any compensation at all, to whover needs it, in accordance with Marx's dictum.

    There's no question that RMS has a political agenda, but then so does the Daemon News, which has repeatedly demonstrated that its political agenda is to try to get people to release software on BSD-like rather than GPL-like terms.