The article attempts to list the five most famous BSDs, but doesn't mention SunOS (aka Solaris). I'm not too impressed by an article on the history of BSD that doesn't mention SunOS, the Mach kernel (except a brief mention of Darwin), OSF/1, or Digital Unix.
One, none of the *BSDs are derived from any of them. They are all based on 4.4BSD-lite from UCB.
Two, I don't belive ANY of the ones you mentioned are BSDs to begin with. Ultrix was, as was SunOS prior to version 5.X. Digital Unix is based on OSF/1 (which is based on SVR2 or atleast requires that license) which is also based on Mach. Yes, you can run a BSD single server on Mach, but it is not BSD based. Solaris is a SysVr4 system.
Plus, none of them are in the BSD family tree except as minor leafs down the line. All of the *BSD are in the major branches (even though OS X is pushing that though...:) )
You also have to remember that FreeBSD didn't exist until 94
Actually it was started in early '93. I started hacking on it in around august of '93 and it had been going for atleast 3 or 4 months before that. And if you consider it a direct decendent of 386BSD then it's even older. 386BSD's big problem during that era was the small amount of driver controllers it could use, it was not until later that it could use the older drives.
I'm not sure if I agree with that. I mean OS X has bash, gcc, emacs, bison, and more.
So does FreeBSD... But as far as I know, the default editor in OS X is NOT emacs, it's vi. The default shell is NOT bash, but csh. Apple could do a OS X without GNU utils quite easily.
OS X is a BSD with a bastard version of the Mach microkernel. The same notes that apply to *BSD apply to OS X.
My first log entry on my home box (DSL) showing this came up Sep 12... So almost 2 weeks ago.
The entry is as follows: [Thu Sep 12 17:40:09 2002] [error] [client 211.75.133.54] client sent HTTP/1.1 request without hostname (see RFC2616 section 14.23):/
I've had a total of about 45 hits in the last 2 weeks, not like nimda at all in that regard (had to nuke my error logs like twice a week instead of once a month).
BWP (BTW, I'm running FreeBSD and no SSL so it's not that big a deal for me.)
It's not often/. leaves me with a huge grin anymore but the image of you jumping up, punching the air and yelling, "Woohoo! I get to work with Postgres!" left me with one.
This reminds me of a project I worked on last year. I had done the initial design on PostgreSQL/Perl. After a 5 months of smooth operation, the powers that be decided I should redo it in MySQL/PHP. The PHP I could handle, but MySQL was a bit too much. After I found PhpPgAdmin (ie a nice web interface), they let me continue to use PostgreSQL. I that point I DID jump up and down and yell... Just ask my wife, I got the funniest looks that day...
Functions returning multiple rows and/or multiple columns are now much easier to use than before. You can call such a "table function" in the SELECT FROM clause, treating its output like a table. Also, plpgsql functions can now return sets.
Minor correction: InnoDB *does* add foreign key constraints.
Do they still let you drop a table that is depended on by an FK? InnoDB databases did about 8 months ago. If this is the case then FK constraints are worthless...
Well PostgreSQL has all of these, but a question thats been floating around in my head is: Will MySQL still be "lightning fast" after they add all of this?
PostgreSQL 7.3 is raising the bar again: schema support, drop column support, major bug fixes, table functions (ie return tuples) andprepared queries are just some of the things they have added in 7.3. Can MySQL match these AND KEEP THE SPEED?
I mean as long as you stick to MyISM tables your fast, but...
Ahhh could be that MySQL is not to be found anywhere on the SDK lists, which list such things as Perl5, PHP, PostgreSQL, Apache, etc?
If it was Novell supported (just having a couple of engineers port something does not make if official/supported;at one time oracle had a FreeBSD port done, but you could not get it outside of oracle) I think it would be listed along with the other supported apps.
I also tried google, but nothing came up on a Novell site about MySQL for NetWare (in the top 20 or 30 that is).
If the NDA only applies to installers, custom software and the like, all bets are off. Sure they can talk about libc, KDE and gcc all they want, they can even redistribute them. But they can't talk about the installer, the enterprise management system or whatever. Nor can they redistribute those programs or the source, they are NOT GPL.
As long as any of those programs do not require GPL software to function (outside the granted exception of kernel modules), then the NDA can apply to them just fine.
BWP obDisclaimer: I have NO IDEA what is under the hood of UL, these things just came out of thin air.
"Public domain" code can be stolen and made proprietary.
By definition, "Public Domain" code is owned by no one! Or by everyone, depends on how you look at it. The only reason I've never release my stuff into the public domain (outside of some of my VERY early code)is that I want the disclaimer that comes with the BSDL and saw no reason to write my own license. Credit is nice, but if someone does not do it, I'm not going to get twisted out of shape.
It's wrong for you to be able to take code which is free and developed by someone else and use it in a closed source application.
This is in YOUR opinion! I use the BSDL for all of my free software, becuase I want the most people to get the most use out of it. If I've written something useful, I want it to be used! If I'm worried about a proprietary use, I just won't release it. Which way I go is my choice, no one elses.
BTW, I was a FreeBSD developer for about 7 years. I started the FreeBSD FAQ, wrote docs, hacked/wrote drivers, applications, libraries and kernel land in FreeBSD. So I'm quite willing to put my money where my mouth is...:)
Number one if GPL'ed code was in the public domain, then NO ONE would have a copyright on it, and therefore NO ONE would have to license it.
As for the FUD ware of BSD code not being free, BS! I was a FreeBSD developer for almost 7 years, and was quite happy to have my code used by people for WHATEVER purpose. Is my code still in FreeBSD? (Goes and checks source tree) Yeap sure is! It has not been taken from the public. The BSD license is ALOT closer to public domain than the GPL, by far! All the BSDL does is make sure that I'm not sued if it's broken and that I get credit somewhere along the way. Thats it. If YoYoDyne decides they want to code, grabs and copy and make a million on it, oh well. My code is STILL out there for everyone else! I'm not going to take your code just because you used mine. That is my choice.
With the BSDL you have true freedom; take my code and do ANYTHING you want with it. Just don't say you wrote it, don't sue me if it's broken and give me credit. That is freedom.
I guess I got my MCSE before the price went through the roof (Call it 1997). But then again, I did not take the classes, but just the tests. Nowhere near $15,000 though. What bugs me though, is that I've not used the damn thing since I left the company that paid me to get it...
But remember the definition of dervived software. If I don't accept the GPL as a license for me to use the software, then ONLY copyright law stands.
That means I can look at header files and even the code to see how it works. All I have to worry about are patents, as trade secrets are moot as regard to GPL'ed software.
That means I can see how the authors implemented it, but I just can't use their code.
BTW, I publish under a BSD license, so most of this does not concern me directly...:)
What came up after analysis was that the MS stack had the same EXACT characteristics (including bugs) as the BSD stack. This is what caused people to take a closer look to begin with. The chances of two people coding a TCP/IP stack that close are out of this world.
Plus it depends on which version of the BSD license is at question, with the first you would have to mention that your product includes code developed by whoever if you mentioned that feature in ads or such. The second version drops this. Sometime look at some of the ads from the early 90's that contained BSD code..:)
It would have to at the state or federal appeals level for a precedent to be set. Local or district courts do not count for this. Until they get to a higher level, dececisions only count for the case at hand.
Even then, only the US supreame court talks for the nation as a whole. (or congress)
As far as teaching the test, I totaly agree with you. I've got two kids in school here in Texas and everytime that it gets even close to test time, they go into major "teach the test" mode.
I've had to sit down and teach my daughter some basic stuff and it is starting to get me more and more upset with the system.
When was the last time you even read the book? They NEVER targeted cities or cilvilan targets! Everything they targeted was either in the water, on mountain tops, in the middle of deserts or military targets (cheyenne(sp) moutain was flattened). Yes some people died (idiots mostly; who goes and sight sees at or near ground zero of large rocks?). And unlike the UN, they never used nukes... Just real big rocks.
Lets see, luna did not attack until they had been attacked, the UN used war gas, the UN used nukes and they attacked cities. All Luna did was throw rocks.
There is a difference between terorists and being at war. A big one. It is real obvious you don't know the difference. During war, you do what it takes to win, plain and simple. (Think USA and Japan, WWII)
As for being a bad book, I don't think so, it won a hugo back in the 60's.
Is your PostgreSQL database tuned? Have you vacuum analayzed the database since you loaded it? Do you have indexes on the proper columns? Have you checked for any SQL gotchas? How much shared mem does Pg have? Sort mem?
This type of statement comes up a couple of times a week on the mailing lists. It sounds more like an untuned database more than anything else. If PostgreSQL was that slow NO ONE would use it!
Lets see some real world open source site examples: Is SourceForge slow? (Pg)(Only the mailing lists are DB2 right now) Is PHPbuilder slow? (Pg)
Most likely they have more than 400k rows, 12 columns and 60 users at a time. What does this tell you?
Slashdot Mirror
The article attempts to list the five most famous BSDs, but doesn't mention SunOS (aka Solaris). I'm not too impressed by an article on the history of BSD that doesn't mention SunOS, the Mach kernel (except a brief mention of Darwin), OSF/1, or Digital Unix.
One, none of the *BSDs are derived from any of them. They are all based on 4.4BSD-lite from UCB.
Two, I don't belive ANY of the ones you mentioned are BSDs to begin with. Ultrix was, as was SunOS prior to version 5.X. Digital Unix is based on OSF/1 (which is based on SVR2 or atleast requires that license) which is also based on Mach. Yes, you can run a BSD single server on Mach, but it is not BSD based. Solaris is a SysVr4 system.
Plus, none of them are in the BSD family tree except as minor leafs down the line. All of the *BSD are in the major branches (even though OS X is pushing that though...:) )
BWP
Just one small nitpick here...
You also have to remember that FreeBSD didn't exist until 94
Actually it was started in early '93. I started hacking on it in around august of '93 and it had been going for atleast 3 or 4 months before that. And if you consider it a direct decendent of 386BSD then it's even older. 386BSD's big problem during that era was the small amount of driver controllers it could use, it was not until later that it could use the older drives.
BWP
I'm not sure if I agree with that. I mean OS X has bash, gcc, emacs, bison, and more.
So does FreeBSD... But as far as I know, the default editor in OS X is NOT emacs, it's vi. The default shell is NOT bash, but csh. Apple could do a OS X without GNU utils quite easily.
OS X is a BSD with a bastard version of the Mach microkernel. The same notes that apply to *BSD apply to OS X.
BWP
My first log entry on my home box (DSL) showing this came up Sep 12... So almost 2 weeks ago.
/
The entry is as follows:
[Thu Sep 12 17:40:09 2002] [error] [client 211.75.133.54] client sent HTTP/1.1 request without hostname (see RFC2616 section 14.23):
I've had a total of about 45 hits in the last 2 weeks, not like nimda at all in that regard (had to nuke my error logs like twice a week instead of once a month).
BWP
(BTW, I'm running FreeBSD and no SSL so it's not that big a deal for me.)
It's not often /. leaves me with a huge grin anymore but the image of you jumping up, punching the air and yelling, "Woohoo! I get to work with Postgres!" left me with one.
This reminds me of a project I worked on last year. I had done the initial design on PostgreSQL/Perl. After a 5 months of smooth operation, the powers that be decided I should redo it in MySQL/PHP. The PHP I could handle, but MySQL was a bit too much. After I found PhpPgAdmin (ie a nice web interface), they let me continue to use PostgreSQL. I that point I DID jump up and down and yell... Just ask my wife, I got the funniest looks that day...
BWP
Table Functions
Functions returning multiple rows and/or multiple columns are
now much easier to use than before. You can call such a
"table function" in the SELECT FROM clause, treating its output
like a table. Also, plpgsql functions can now return sets.
This straight from the history file.
7.3 (which is in beta) has added ALOT of stuff.
BWP
MySQL with INNODB tables supports foreign keys .
Ok, lets see, I can STILL drop another table that is referered to by an FK. Can we say BOOM?
I STILL cannot defer my constraints (which makes it a bitch to do some SQL)
I STILL have to pay to do hot backups. (ie otherwise shutdown the database to backup stuff)
BWP
It would be nice if PostGres would support altering live tables (add/remove/modify columns), and stored procedures.
Have you checked out 7.3 for the column support? As for stored procedures, it has support for this also.
BWP
Minor correction: InnoDB *does* add foreign key constraints.
Do they still let you drop a table that is depended on by an FK? InnoDB databases did about 8 months ago. If this is the case then FK constraints are worthless...
BWP
Well PostgreSQL has all of these, but a question thats been floating around in my head is: Will MySQL still be "lightning fast" after they add all of this?
PostgreSQL 7.3 is raising the bar again: schema support, drop column support, major bug fixes, table functions (ie return tuples) andprepared queries are just some of the things they have added in 7.3. Can MySQL match these AND KEEP THE SPEED?
I mean as long as you stick to MyISM tables your fast, but...
BWP
Ahhh could be that MySQL is not to be found anywhere on the SDK lists, which list such things as Perl5, PHP, PostgreSQL, Apache, etc?
If it was Novell supported (just having a couple of engineers port something does not make if official/supported;at one time oracle had a FreeBSD port done, but you could not get it outside of oracle) I think it would be listed along with the other supported apps.
I also tried google, but nothing came up on a Novell site about MySQL for NetWare (in the top 20 or 30 that is).
BWP
The questions is: What does the NDA say?
If the NDA only applies to installers, custom software and the like, all bets are off. Sure they can talk about libc, KDE and gcc all they want, they can even redistribute them. But they can't talk about the installer, the enterprise management system or whatever. Nor can they redistribute those programs or the source, they are NOT GPL.
As long as any of those programs do not require GPL software to function (outside the granted exception of kernel modules), then the NDA can apply to them just fine.
BWP
obDisclaimer: I have NO IDEA what is under the hood of UL, these things just came out of thin air.
So you are.
The ones I hate are the ones the debate either side and have NEVER contributed to a free/open software group. Or wrote something and released it.
IMHO, if you never contributed to the community, you don't have a leg to stand on in this conversation...:)
BWP
There is NOTHING stopping the user from installing either one of these packages from source. Sure, you loose some of the laziness factor, but..
Sure, if Red Hat said "Installing anything but our software voids your support", you might have a case. But in this case?? No...
BWP
"Public domain" code can be stolen and made proprietary.
By definition, "Public Domain" code is owned by no one! Or by everyone, depends on how you look at it. The only reason I've never release my stuff into the public domain (outside of some of my VERY early code)is that I want the disclaimer that comes with the BSDL and saw no reason to write my own license. Credit is nice, but if someone does not do it, I'm not going to get twisted out of shape.
It's wrong for you to be able to take code which is free and developed by someone else and use it in a closed source application.
This is in YOUR opinion! I use the BSDL for all of my free software, becuase I want the most people to get the most use out of it. If I've written something useful, I want it to be used! If I'm worried about a proprietary use, I just won't release it. Which way I go is my choice, no one elses.
BTW, I was a FreeBSD developer for about 7 years. I started the FreeBSD FAQ, wrote docs, hacked/wrote drivers, applications, libraries and kernel land in FreeBSD. So I'm quite willing to put my money where my mouth is...:)
BWP
Number one if GPL'ed code was in the public domain, then NO ONE would have a copyright on it, and therefore NO ONE would have to license it.
As for the FUD ware of BSD code not being free, BS! I was a FreeBSD developer for almost 7 years, and was quite happy to have my code used by people for WHATEVER purpose. Is my code still in FreeBSD? (Goes and checks source tree) Yeap sure is! It has not been taken from the public.
The BSD license is ALOT closer to public domain than the GPL, by far! All the BSDL does is make sure that I'm not sued if it's broken and that I get credit somewhere along the way. Thats it.
If YoYoDyne decides they want to code, grabs and copy and make a million on it, oh well. My code is STILL out there for everyone else! I'm not going to take your code just because you used mine. That is my choice.
With the BSDL you have true freedom; take my code and do ANYTHING you want with it. Just don't say you wrote it, don't sue me if it's broken and give me credit. That is freedom.
BWP
I guess I got my MCSE before the price went through the roof (Call it 1997). But then again, I did not take the classes, but just the tests. Nowhere near $15,000 though. What bugs me though, is that I've not used the damn thing since I left the company that paid me to get it...
BWP
But remember the definition of dervived software. If I don't accept the GPL as a license for me to use the software, then ONLY copyright law stands.
That means I can look at header files and even the code to see how it works. All I have to worry about are patents, as trade secrets are moot as regard to GPL'ed software.
That means I can see how the authors implemented it, but I just can't use their code.
BTW, I publish under a BSD license, so most of this does not concern me directly...:)
BWP
Nevermind. I should never have taken the bait.
Just because a troll is a beliver does not make it any more a troll.
BWP
Christianity has the complete truth, though.
One question.
Prove it.
Thats all. Present this complete truth in such manner that it is completly self consistent and does not require faith to prove or understand.
If you have to put down other religions for it to work, it ain't the truth.
BWP
Ah, no...
What came up after analysis was that the MS stack had the same EXACT characteristics (including bugs) as the BSD stack. This is what caused people to take a closer look to begin with.
The chances of two people coding a TCP/IP stack that close are out of this world.
Plus it depends on which version of the BSD license is at question, with the first you would have to mention that your product includes code developed by whoever if you mentioned that feature in ads or such. The second version drops this. Sometime look at some of the ads from the early 90's that contained BSD code..:)
BWP
It would have to at the state or federal appeals level for a precedent to be set. Local or district courts do not count for this. Until they get to a higher level, dececisions only count for the case at hand.
Even then, only the US supreame court talks for the nation as a whole. (or congress)
BWP
As far as teaching the test, I totaly agree with you. I've got two kids in school here in Texas and everytime that it gets even close to test time, they go into major "teach the test" mode.
I've had to sit down and teach my daughter some basic stuff and it is starting to get me more and more upset with the system.
BWP
Huh?
When was the last time you even read the book? They NEVER targeted cities or cilvilan targets! Everything they targeted was either in the water, on mountain tops, in the middle of deserts or military targets (cheyenne(sp) moutain was flattened). Yes some people died (idiots mostly; who goes and sight sees at or near ground zero of large rocks?). And unlike the UN, they never used nukes... Just real big rocks.
Lets see, luna did not attack until they had been attacked, the UN used war gas, the UN used nukes and they attacked cities. All Luna did was throw rocks.
There is a difference between terorists and being at war. A big one. It is real obvious you don't know the difference. During war, you do what it takes to win, plain and simple. (Think USA and Japan, WWII)
As for being a bad book, I don't think so, it won a hugo back in the 60's.
BWP
Is your PostgreSQL database tuned?
Have you vacuum analayzed the database since you loaded it?
Do you have indexes on the proper columns?
Have you checked for any SQL gotchas?
How much shared mem does Pg have? Sort mem?
This type of statement comes up a couple of times a week on the mailing lists. It sounds more like an untuned database more than anything else. If PostgreSQL was that slow NO ONE would use it!
Lets see some real world open source site examples:
Is SourceForge slow? (Pg)(Only the mailing lists are DB2 right now)
Is PHPbuilder slow? (Pg)
Most likely they have more than 400k rows, 12 columns and 60 users at a time. What does this tell you?
BWP