Will these run NetBSD? I've been playing with BSD on PPC chips and it a damn sight better than everything else I've ever touched (except DEC UNIX). I'd seriously look into one of these if it ran NetBSD (or any other varient).
No, you're wrong. People put that dumbass copyright statement at the head of their files and one of the statements is that the end user may use that version or any later version of the GPL at their option.
No you cannot because the GPL permits no further restrictions upon redistribution than those explicitly listed in the GPL. The advertising clause is considered a further restriction.
Hey, I could grab FreeBSD, call it "Seldnix" and release it under the GPL. As long as I "Duplicated the above notice, the two conditions, and the disclaimer" the FreeBSD people could, at worst, make loud rude noises in my direction.
Actually, you couldn't. The GPL will not let you use BSD-licensed code.
FreeBSD, Apache, X Windows, SunOS, Solaris, MacOS, DEC UNIX, NeXT, IRIX, Unicos/mk, Mach, and dozens of others are examples of what free redistribution can give you. You should really know what you talk about before you post.
I challenge you to find a modern Unix which does not contain a line of BSD code. Even your precious Linux has a few files with BSD copyrights at the top...
The problem here is that the BSD community is just as friendly and helpful (and far more knowledgable) than the Linux user community. People who say that BSD users are snobs, bastards, etc are merely spreading FUD to keep people from trying BSD.
I tend to find this a good thing. It makes it dirt simple to upgrade. I've spent far too many hours downloading the latest shutils, textutils, etc for a Linux system to bring it up to date after an install. With FreeBSD, you can simple update everything once with CVS and a simple make world. If you do not want to make world, it is easy enough to make just those applications which need remaking by hand. I have never had a problem with dependencies doing this. This is made simpler by the daily snapshots.
Please describe some of the internal strife that wrecks FreeBSD.
Also, if if DeRaadt chooses not to support a VAX port, that is up to him and his developers. He still has half a dozen platforms OpenBSD does support. You misread that. It is an invitation to anyone who would like maintain a VAX port.
BSD is dead. Mac is dead. Put them together and you get one of the best OSes and one of the most highly profitable companies in the industry.
This is typical Slashdot facts do not matter bullshit. Have you used OSX or Darwin? They are simpler incredible systems. High performace. Simple interface and all the power of a real BSD underneath. I was in heaven.
No problems at all. I set the date on my two DNS servers to 1970 and 1975 to figure out why the hell they were not picking up the correct time. I did this this morning. I have had no trouble at all except for the fact the dates are not being set correctly using xntpd.
closed development: This is simply not true. Last month I suddenly turned up on the mailing lists posting code and it has all been welcomed by the community.
contempt: This is rare.
hypocrisy: There is current work being done replacing those GNU utilities which are present. Anyway, FSF is just as guilty.
fragmentation: Free, Net, Open, and BSDi are not the same OS, do not characterize them as the same. 386BSD has been dead for nearly a decade.
aging user base: I started using BSD three years ago when I was 16.
innovation: CAM, UVM, and this is only in the past couple months.
single source: Anyone can resell BSD (Cheap Bytes, Walnut Creek)
third party: The ports tree (a place where you can install any third party program with a FreeBSD port with one statement) contains nearly 3000 applications.
CSRG: That was 5 years ago, since then, BSD development has done nothing but grow. BSD is not dying.
Slashdot Mirror
The Free Software Foundation and Slashdotters come to mind. Go reread comments in response to the article where UCB dropped the advertising clause.
I thought Slashdotters didn't believe in intellectual property rights.
Will these run NetBSD? I've been playing with BSD on PPC chips and it a damn sight better than everything else I've ever touched (except DEC UNIX). I'd seriously look into one of these if it ran NetBSD (or any other varient).
Sure, but why would you want to? BTW, it is pretty swank to see someone quoting me.
No, you're wrong. People put that dumbass copyright statement at the head of their files and one of the statements is that the end user may use that version or any later version of the GPL at their option.
If RedHat adds their own patches, then it isn't "one kernel" anymore, is it?
No you cannot because the GPL permits no further restrictions upon redistribution than those explicitly listed in the GPL. The advertising clause is considered a further restriction.
Hey, I could grab FreeBSD, call it "Seldnix" and release it under the GPL. As long as I "Duplicated the above notice, the two conditions, and the disclaimer" the FreeBSD people could, at worst, make loud rude noises in my direction.
Actually, you couldn't. The GPL will not let you use BSD-licensed code.
But many licenses work better than the GPL.
FreeBSD, Apache, X Windows, SunOS, Solaris, MacOS, DEC UNIX, NeXT, IRIX, Unicos/mk, Mach, and dozens of others are examples of what free redistribution can give you. You should really know what you talk about before you post.
I challenge you to find a modern Unix which does not contain a line of BSD code. Even your precious Linux has a few files with BSD copyrights at the top...
No, we should be pushing people to use software licenses which permit free redistribution instead of licenses which do not (GPL, LGPL).
This is not flamebait. This is funny, moderate this up and to funny.
And people thought those who ported OpenBSD to the Dreamcast has too much time on their hands.
Along that vein, why isn't this "wacky"? Have Slashdot's editors decided to exercise editorial control over the thoughts of their readers?
The problem here is that the BSD community is just as friendly and helpful (and far more knowledgable) than the Linux user community. People who say that BSD users are snobs, bastards, etc are merely spreading FUD to keep people from trying BSD.
Aug 97. But don't they use a BSD-derivative on the primary systems?
So should they also include other systems like SunOS, Solaris, AIX, SCO, Linux, DEC UNIX, MacOS, and others derived from BSD?
Isn't that Jordan Hubbard? Otherwise, yes, I wish I could afford to go.
I tend to find this a good thing. It makes it dirt simple to upgrade. I've spent far too many hours downloading the latest shutils, textutils, etc for a Linux system to bring it up to date after an install. With FreeBSD, you can simple update everything once with CVS and a simple make world. If you do not want to make world, it is easy enough to make just those applications which need remaking by hand. I have never had a problem with dependencies doing this. This is made simpler by the daily snapshots.
Please describe some of the internal strife that wrecks FreeBSD.
Also, if if DeRaadt chooses not to support a VAX port, that is up to him and his developers. He still has half a dozen platforms OpenBSD does support. You misread that. It is an invitation to anyone who would like maintain a VAX port.
BSD is dead. Mac is dead. Put them together and you get one of the best OSes and one of the most highly profitable companies in the industry.
This is typical Slashdot facts do not matter bullshit. Have you used OSX or Darwin? They are simpler incredible systems. High performace. Simple interface and all the power of a real BSD underneath. I was in heaven.
No problems at all. I set the date on my two DNS servers to 1970 and 1975 to figure out why the hell they were not picking up the correct time. I did this this morning. I have had no trouble at all except for the fact the dates are not being set correctly using xntpd.
The GPL is ugly and immoral. End of story. It also does not promote public domain software. It promotes virus infected software.
Apple would not license MacOS to them.
A quick search of Bloomberg revield nothing. Post a link. Otherwise, these are just more anti-BSD lies.
Dumbass, that would be illegal.
closed development: This is simply not true. Last month I suddenly turned up on the mailing lists posting code and it has all been welcomed by the community.
contempt: This is rare.
hypocrisy: There is current work being done replacing those GNU utilities which are present. Anyway, FSF is just as guilty.
fragmentation: Free, Net, Open, and BSDi are not the same OS, do not characterize them as the same. 386BSD has been dead for nearly a decade.
aging user base: I started using BSD three years ago when I was 16.
innovation: CAM, UVM, and this is only in the past couple months.
single source: Anyone can resell BSD (Cheap Bytes, Walnut Creek)
third party: The ports tree (a place where you can install any third party program with a FreeBSD port with one statement) contains nearly 3000 applications.
CSRG: That was 5 years ago, since then, BSD development has done nothing but grow. BSD is not dying.