From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 17:15:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BA5B37B422 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:15:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.47.12]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA13BE for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:21:02 -0700 Message-ID: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:15:35 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver pretty slimy. So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as well? Will they try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com people upped, left, and started over with their own company. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 17:42:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mls.gtonet.net (mls.gtonet.net [216.112.90.195]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A8B37B423 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:42:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oldfart@gtonet.net) Received: from pld (pld.gtonet.net [216.112.90.200]) by mls.gtonet.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f3I0gcS13438 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:42:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oldfart@gtonet.net) Reply-To: From: "oldfart@gtonet" To: Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:42:36 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-To: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Nothing personal but I say, "good riddance" to ANYTHING Linux. IMHO, OF > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > [mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:16 PM > To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > > > Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by > surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* > for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than > they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver > pretty slimy. > > So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as well? Will they > try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve > Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com > people upped, left, and started over with their own company. > > David > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 17:47: 4 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mooseriver.com (erie.mooseriver.com [205.166.121.26]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0052837B422 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:47:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jgrosch@mooseriver.com) Received: (from jgrosch@localhost) by mooseriver.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) id f3I0l0T79940; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:47:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jgrosch) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:47:00 -0700 From: Josef Grosch To: David Johnson Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010417174700.A79803@mooseriver.com> Reply-To: jgrosch@mooseriver.com References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com>; from djohnson@acuson.com on Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:15:35PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:15:35PM -0700, David Johnson wrote: > Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by > surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* > for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than > they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver > pretty slimy. > > So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as well? Will they > try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve > Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com > people upped, left, and started over with their own company. It's sad to see that WindRiver has chosen not to hire the Slackware developers that were employed at Walnut Creek/BSDi. They did great things. WindRiver has stated that they will continue to support FreeBSD just as Walnut Creek/BSDi did. See this link; http://www.windriver.com/press/html/bsdi_faq.html To be perfectly honest, I am a little suspicious of WindRiver. I hear them talk the talk, I want to see them walk the walk. I think the real reason they bought BSDi is because in the embedded systems space they rule, but they have seen the embedded Linux system making inroads into their market. They decided that they need an Open Source System to compete. The BSD license is more business friendly so why not buy a troubled BSD company. I guess the suits at WindRiver decided that the baggage that BSDi came with, namely FreeBSD, was not going to be too much trouble besides if they treat FreeBSD nice they might get good karma points with the Open Source people. Lord knows with WindRivers licensing and pricing structure they are going to need all the good karma points they can get. Time will tell. Josef -- Josef Grosch | Another day closer to a | FreeBSD 4.3 jgrosch@MooseRiver.com | Micro$oft free world | www.bafug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 17:53:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from cluck.stealthchickens.org (cluck.stealthchickens.org [209.192.217.153]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DD6F37B42C for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:53:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mij@osdn.com) Received: from guinness.osdn.com (root@cluck.stealthchickens.org [209.192.217.153]) by cluck.stealthchickens.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3I0rBd21441; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 20:53:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mij@osdn.com) Received: by guinness.osdn.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6FE4A9B; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 20:53:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 20:53:10 -0400 From: Jim Mock To: David Johnson Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010417205309.A1533@guinness.osdn.com> Reply-To: mij@osdn.com References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.17i In-Reply-To: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com>; from djohnson@acuson.com on Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:15:35PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 at 17:15:35 -0700, David Johnson wrote: > Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by > surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* > for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than > they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver > pretty slimy. Why? Because they don't want to use GPL'd software in their products? Wind River wanted BSD licensed stuff. They'd have no reason to hire the Slackware guys (by the way, "all" equals 4 people). Slackware wasn't a part of the deal in the first place. Go read the FAQ that accompanied the press release: http://www.windriver.com/press/html/bsdi_faq.html This is why they didn't hire the Slackware guys: Much of the innovative and differentiating software for embedded applications is developed at the kernel level, so the BSD license is considered to be far more "business-friendly" than agreements like the GNU General Public License (GPL), which governs the use of Linux (another UNIX-based OS). The BSD license allows this critical software asset to be owned by its authors. In other words, they aren't interested in GPL'd software. > So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as well? Will > they try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve > Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com > people upped, left, and started over with their own company. *sigh* Wind River wanted BSDi's software assets because of the BSD license and the fact they'll use bits of FreeBSD in their products. Why would they can the developers? That's like chopping of your feet because they're sore. WR wouldn't have even bothered with hiring the FreeBSD developers on staff if they were going to can them a week or two later. - jim -- - jim mock - O|S|D|N - open source development network - - http://www.freebsdzine.org/ - jim@freebsdzine.org - jim@FreeBSD.org - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 17:59:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from magnesium.net (toxic.magnesium.net [207.154.84.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD64037B42C for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:59:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ceren@magnesium.net) Received: (qmail 6527 invoked by uid 1114); 18 Apr 2001 01:03:34 -0000 Date: 17 Apr 2001 18:03:34 -0700 Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:03:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Ceren Ercen To: "oldfart@gtonet" Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I'm sorry you feel like this. Have you ever met the Slackware people? They are pretty amazing. I was lucky enough to be invited into the Walnut Creek booth with them, when WCCDROM was sponsoring the FreeBSD and Slackware presences at conventions. Part of what amazes some people about FreeBSD is that we're able to accomplish so much more per person/contributer than Linux, in general. I feel fairly safe in saying that Slackware has similar personality. I, and perhaps others who are constantly under Damocles' sword of layoffs, cringe to read this sentence of yours. "Nothing personal", perhaps, but fairly cold and cruel, regardless. ...When they came for the linux people, I did not protest, because I didn't like linux...? (note that I have said absolutely nothing criticizing or even commenting on WindRiver's move or its sensibility. ) Ceren Ercen FreeBSD's "Strange Attractor" cercen@linuxcare.com -------------------------------------------------------- On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, oldfart@gtonet wrote: > Nothing personal but I say, "good riddance" to ANYTHING Linux. > > IMHO, > > OF > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > > [mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson > > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:16 PM > > To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > > Subject: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > > > > > > Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by > > surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* > > for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than > > they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver > > pretty slimy. > > > > So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as well? Will they > > try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve > > Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com > > people upped, left, and started over with their own company. > > > > David > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 18: 4:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B79437B42C for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:04:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.47.12]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA241C; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:09:39 -0700 Message-ID: <3ADCE80B.F4097D2C@acuson.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:04:11 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: oldfart@gtonet.net Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "oldfart@gtonet" wrote: > > Nothing personal but I say, "good riddance" to ANYTHING Linux. BSD and Linux should compete on their merits, not on the basis of which side can spit the furthest. Windriver's actions probably did more to alienate the Linux community than it did to help the BSD community. A net negative. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 18:13:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from inconnu.isu.edu (inconnu.isu.edu [134.50.8.55]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 702A537B422 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:13:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from galt@inconnu.isu.edu) Received: from localhost (galt@localhost) by inconnu.isu.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA05757; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:12:54 -0600 Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:12:54 -0600 (MDT) From: John Galt To: "oldfart@gtonet" Cc: Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Copies-to: galt@inconnu.isu.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, oldfart@gtonet wrote: >Nothing personal but I say, "good riddance" to ANYTHING Linux. You are a sick person. Four people laid off and you insult them on the way out. Please seek professional help immediately. >IMHO, > >OF > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >> [mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson >> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:16 PM >> To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >> Subject: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD >> >> >> Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by >> surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* >> for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than >> they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver >> pretty slimy. >> >> So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as well? Will they >> try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve >> Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com >> people upped, left, and started over with their own company. >> >> David >> >> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >> with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > -- Galt's sci-fi paradox: Stormtroopers versus Redshirts to the death. Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 18:15:59 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from tacni.net (mail.tacni.net [216.178.136.165]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 75AED37B43C for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:15:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from needo@cerebro.superhero.org) Received: (qmail 44249 invoked by alias); 18 Apr 2001 01:15:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cerebro.superhero.org) (216.201.173.186) by ns2.sohos.net with SMTP; 18 Apr 2001 01:15:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 694 invoked by uid 1000); 18 Apr 2001 01:15:50 -0000 Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 20:15:50 -0500 From: Erich Zigler To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010417201549.D526@superhero.org> Mail-Followup-To: Erich Zigler , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <3ADCE80B.F4097D2C@acuson.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3ADCE80B.F4097D2C@acuson.com>; from djohnson@acuson.com on Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 06:04:11PM -0700 X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy. X-Shane: Hi Shane! Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 06:04:11PM -0700, David Johnson wrote: > BSD and Linux should compete on their merits, not on the basis of which > side can spit the furthest. Windriver's actions probably did more to > alienate the Linux community than it did to help the BSD community. A > net negative. As if we aren't already alienated enough. Trying to work with die-hard users of any OS is sometimes very difficult. Even more so it seems for Linux and FreeBSD users. When are people going to learn that every OS has it's merits, and that if we can just stop trying to prove who has the larger penis we could accomplish alot more then what we are currently. -- Erich Zigler We aim to please. Ourselves, mostly, but we do aim to please. -- Anthony DeBoer To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 18:22:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mls.gtonet.net (mls.gtonet.net [216.112.90.195]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4EFD37B43F for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:22:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oldfart@gtonet.net) Received: from pld (pld.gtonet.net [216.112.90.200]) by mls.gtonet.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f3I1MRS13636 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:22:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oldfart@gtonet.net) Reply-To: From: "oldfart@gtonet" To: Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:22:26 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I guess, maybe, I wasn't clear enough. I, too, hate to see people laid off. I've had to lay off others and I've been laid off myself. Cruel or not, it's a part of the IT world we live and work in. I'm very sure SOME of them are quite nice people and I wish them no hardships. That said, I could care less about Linux and if it disappeared from the face of the planet tomorrow, it wouldn't be too soon for *me*. Maybe I'm a FreeBSD NUT, maybe I'm a Linux hater, either way or maybe both. :) That's an interesting quote that has been turned around to fit many "causes." Regardless, Linux is not a Right or a Race and when Linux is "came for," I'll be clapping. Linux is NOT the same as Hitler coming for the Jews or the Democrats coming for my guns. I suppose you'll all want to know, WHY I dislike Linux so? Mostly based on the userbase. The constant scans, abuse and DoS attacks of my, and other people's, networks by wannabe-linux-hackers. I think it's quite well said at the following persons website, http://www.spatula.net/proc/linux/index.src I can take no credit for that site, it's not mine. I do love it so. Yes, I know that it's not entirely correct anymore. I think there's even a disclaimer about some of the bugs being fixed and I'm sure some of the links are now dead. That's my story and I'm sticking to it, OF > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > [mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Ceren Ercen > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 6:04 PM > To: oldfart@gtonet > Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > > > > I'm sorry you feel like this. > Have you ever met the Slackware people? They are pretty amazing. > > I was lucky enough to be invited into the Walnut Creek booth with them, > when WCCDROM was sponsoring the FreeBSD and Slackware presences at > conventions. > > Part of what amazes some people about FreeBSD is that we're able to > accomplish so much more per person/contributer than Linux, in general. I > feel fairly safe in saying that Slackware has similar personality. > > I, and perhaps others who are constantly under Damocles' sword of layoffs, > cringe to read this sentence of yours. "Nothing personal", perhaps, but > fairly cold and cruel, regardless. > > ...When they came for the linux people, I did not protest, because I > didn't like linux...? > > (note that I have said absolutely nothing criticizing or even commenting > on WindRiver's move or its sensibility. ) > > Ceren Ercen > FreeBSD's "Strange Attractor" > cercen@linuxcare.com > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, oldfart@gtonet wrote: > > > Nothing personal but I say, "good riddance" to ANYTHING Linux. > > > > IMHO, > > > > OF > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > > > [mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:16 PM > > > To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > > > Subject: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > > > > > > > > > Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by > > > surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* > > > for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than > > > they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver > > > pretty slimy. > > > > > > So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as > well? Will they > > > try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve > > > Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com > > > people upped, left, and started over with their own company. > > > > > > David > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 18:32: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mls.gtonet.net (mls.gtonet.net [216.112.90.195]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C3B337B43F for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:32:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oldfart@gtonet.net) Received: from pld (pld.gtonet.net [216.112.90.200]) by mls.gtonet.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f3I1W5S13668 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:32:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oldfart@gtonet.net) Reply-To: From: "oldfart@gtonet" To: Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:32:04 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-To: <3ADCE80B.F4097D2C@acuson.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I believe FreeBSD and Linux have been competing based on their merits. Almost everything I've read puts FreeBSD above Linux in the server arena, at least. The fact that Windriver has decided to dump Linux may well back that up. I don't know anything about Windriver except what's been posted here, so their politics are unknown to me. As for the future, only time will tell. IMHO, Charles > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > [mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 6:04 PM > To: oldfart@gtonet.net > Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > > > "oldfart@gtonet" wrote: > > > > Nothing personal but I say, "good riddance" to ANYTHING Linux. > > BSD and Linux should compete on their merits, not on the basis of which > side can spit the furthest. Windriver's actions probably did more to > alienate the Linux community than it did to help the BSD community. A > net negative. > > David > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 18:34:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mls.gtonet.net (mls.gtonet.net [216.112.90.195]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA7E737B423 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:34:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oldfart@gtonet.net) Received: from pld (pld.gtonet.net [216.112.90.200]) by mls.gtonet.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f3I1YcS13677 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:34:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oldfart@gtonet.net) Reply-To: From: "oldfart@gtonet" To: "freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD. ORG" Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:34:37 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I meant nothing personal, and that's why I said "nothing personal." I wish NOBODY any harm or hardships. Layoffs are a part of life nowadays. Get used to it. You can shove your personal help. Sincerely, Charles > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > [mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of John Galt > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 6:13 PM > To: oldfart@gtonet > Cc: > Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > > > On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, oldfart@gtonet wrote: > > >Nothing personal but I say, "good riddance" to ANYTHING Linux. > > You are a sick person. Four people laid off and you insult them on the > way out. Please seek professional help immediately. > > >IMHO, > > > >OF > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > >> [mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:16 PM > >> To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > >> Subject: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > >> > >> > >> Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by > >> surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* > >> for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than > >> they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver > >> pretty slimy. > >> > >> So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as well? > Will they > >> try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve > >> Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com > >> people upped, left, and started over with their own company. > >> > >> David > >> > >> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > >> with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > > > > -- > Galt's sci-fi paradox: Stormtroopers versus Redshirts to the death. > > Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 19: 2: 2 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B244737B42C for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:01:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.47.12]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA3411; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:07:24 -0700 Message-ID: <3ADCF592.8C695855@acuson.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:01:54 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mij@osdn.com Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> <20010417205309.A1533@guinness.osdn.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jim Mock wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 at 17:15:35 -0700, David Johnson wrote: > > Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by > > surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* > > for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than > > they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver > > pretty slimy. > > Why? Because they don't want to use GPL'd software in their products? > Wind River wanted BSD licensed stuff. They'd have no reason to hire the > Slackware guys (by the way, "all" equals 4 people). Slackware wasn't a > part of the deal in the first place. Go read the FAQ that accompanied > the press release: It's more than just not liking the GPL. I don't like the GPL. I think it sucks. But mere mentioning of the differences between the BSD and GPL licenses is bizarre. My biggest problem with Windriver's GPL statements is one of attitude. They bought the *rights* to BSD/OS, so they can do whatever they want with it, regardless of its licensing. If they had said "we're going to use FreeBSD because of its licensing", that would have been well and good. But instead they said "we're going to buy the rights to BSD/OS because of its licensing." That just doesn't make sense. BSD/OS is not under the BSD license, and FreeBSD is not up for sale. Windriver's actions had nothing at all to do with licensing, but a lot to do with casting fear, uncertaintly and doubt upon their Linux competitors. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 19:10:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from meow.osd.bsdi.com (meow.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.88]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A8E137B422 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:10:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (john@jhb-laptop.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.241]) by meow.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f3I2A7G27411; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:10:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3ADCF592.8C695855@acuson.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:09:35 -0700 (PDT) From: John Baldwin To: David Johnson Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org, mij@osdn.com Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 18-Apr-01 David Johnson wrote: > Jim Mock wrote: >> >> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 at 17:15:35 -0700, David Johnson wrote: >> > Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by >> > surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* >> > for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than >> > they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver >> > pretty slimy. >> >> Why? Because they don't want to use GPL'd software in their products? >> Wind River wanted BSD licensed stuff. They'd have no reason to hire the >> Slackware guys (by the way, "all" equals 4 people). Slackware wasn't a >> part of the deal in the first place. Go read the FAQ that accompanied >> the press release: > > It's more than just not liking the GPL. I don't like the GPL. I think it > sucks. But mere mentioning of the differences between the BSD and GPL > licenses is bizarre. My biggest problem with Windriver's GPL statements > is one of attitude. They bought the *rights* to BSD/OS, so they can do > whatever they want with it, regardless of its licensing. If they had > said "we're going to use FreeBSD because of its licensing", that would > have been well and good. But instead they said "we're going to buy the > rights to BSD/OS because of its licensing." That just doesn't make > sense. BSD/OS is not under the BSD license, and FreeBSD is not up for > sale. > > Windriver's actions had nothing at all to do with licensing, but a lot > to do with casting fear, uncertaintly and doubt upon their Linux > competitors. No, that is incorrect. WindRiver (not WinDriver or Windriver ) does plan on using at least some FreeBSD technologies in some shape or another. As they said in their statement, many of the modifications are in the kernel, and they don't want to open up the source of VxWorks or Tornado to their competitors, so the BSD license is a bit more to their liking than the GPL. Please stop spreading FUD. There are some other issues at hand as well, but suffice it so say that WindRiver is legitimately interested in BSD moreso than Linux at least partially due to licensing issues. > David -- John Baldwin -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 17 19:36:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.22.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E7837B424 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:36:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3I2aDO63834; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:36:13 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:36:11 -0400 To: David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 5:15 PM -0700 4/17/01, David Johnson wrote: >Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught >me by surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware >was *profitable* for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've >lost more in good will than they will gain. [etc] Note that this mailing list is for discussing ways to advocate ("promote") FreeBSD. It is not like an advocacy newsgroup in the land of usenet, where all heated debates are banished to. This particular topic is probably better suited to freebsd-chat. Maybe that's not right either, and it's probably not fair for me to suggest that since I don't follow freebsd-chat... :-) -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 0: 1:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7BC637B423 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:01:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3I71Vk37246; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:01:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "David Johnson" , Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:01:31 -0700 Message-ID: <006701c0c7d5$65e45c40$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In every corporate acquisition there's always bits that don't fit and eventually get cut off. This is a natural part of this process. The fact is that it's illegal to buy and sell people like cattle, and while you can buy and sell products all you want, your never guarenteed that just because you buy a product that all the employees are going to choose to go to work for you. This is a difficult problem for software companies particularly, since most of the company's value is in the butts of the people warming the chairs in the cubicles, not in the end results of those folks. I think that you can't fault Windriver for this, because their only legal option was to sell the Slackware product to someone, presuming that the employees would follow along. But, can you imagine how difficult this would be, who would buy it? And even if they did, it's still the buyer's option to offer automatic employment to all prior employees of a purchased product, and there's no guarentee that would have happened either. The layoff was really the best way to do it because now any CDROM distributor that wants to add a Linux distribution to their collection can pick up Slackware for free, and offer jobs to the people cut from Windriver/BSDi/Walnut Creek. If Slackware was profitable as you state, then there's going to be a number of them that are going to want to pick this up, and if it was profitable, then why hamstring it by tying it to a BSD company? Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson >Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:16 PM >To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > > >Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by >surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* >for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than >they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver >pretty slimy. > >So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as well? Will they >try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve >Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com >people upped, left, and started over with their own company. > >David > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 0:17: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8216837B423 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:16:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Rahul.Siddharthan@lpt.ens.fr) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f3I7Gsq06928 ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 09:16:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id JAA28112 ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 09:16:52 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 09:16:52 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> Mail-Followup-To: Ted Mittelstaedt , David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> <006701c0c7d5$65e45c40$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <006701c0c7d5$65e45c40$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 12:01:31AM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted Mittelstaedt said on Apr 18, 2001 at 00:01:31: > In every corporate acquisition there's always bits that don't > fit and eventually get cut off. This is a natural part of > this process. > > The fact is that it's illegal to buy and sell people like cattle, > and while you can buy and sell products all you want, your > never guarenteed that just because you buy a product that > all the employees are going to choose to go to work for you. > This is a difficult problem for software companies particularly, > since most of the company's value is in the butts of the people > warming the chairs in the cubicles, not in the end results of > those folks. > > I think that you can't fault Windriver for this, because their > only legal option was to sell the Slackware product to someone, I agree that it's difficult, in principle, to fault them for it. Nevertheless, I was uneasy about the takeover and what it means for FreeBSD, and this news will make many people uneasy if they weren't already. Because Wind River's only motivation is to be able to close the source if they want to. Another bit of uneasy news was Apple's threatening a Mac theme editor, http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=2773 Note that this is quite different from threatening themes.org: this editor was for creating themes for *MacOS itself*. FreeBSD people justify the ability of Apple, Wind River et al to commercialise BSD, by saying that these companies do contribute back to the original source. Maybe individual people at Apple play nice, but Apple the company has never played nice. Their hardware has always been closed; they sued Microsoft for Windows, claiming it copies their GUI (which they themselves had lifted from Xerox); they have recently been claiming the idea of theming. Consider the following scenario: Apple has a patent on some very low-level algorithm, but doesn't tell people. (They do claim a patent on theming, so why not on some OS-related thing?) Their people (no doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD. It gets into -current, then into a stable release, becomes well entrenched into the OS. Then the legal people at Apple decide that FreeBSD has no right to distribute this patented stuff for free, and threaten to sue. I'm not being paranoid here. People may individually play nice, but one should never assume that corporations will play nice. Or that, if they're playing nice today, they will play nice tomorrow. Their personality depends entirely on who's in charge. It's the money, and the money only. While Wind River is not Apple, it seems to me that they too would have a motivation for trying to close FreeBSD, perhaps through some such underhand way. If they contribute any really useful technology to the system, they would not want other companies to be able to make use of it. - Rahul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 0:30:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mta02-svc.ntlworld.com (mta02-svc.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.42]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB86B37B424; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:30:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scott.mitchell@mail.com) Received: from lungfish.ntlworld.com ([62.253.151.79]) by mta02-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.27 201-229-119-110) with ESMTP id <20010418073019.KJYD290.mta02-svc.ntlworld.com@lungfish.ntlworld.com>; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:30:19 +0100 Received: (from scott@localhost) by lungfish.ntlworld.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA03651; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:29:41 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from scott) Message-ID: <20010418082941.16321@localhost> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:29:41 +0100 From: Scott Mitchell To: John Baldwin , David Johnson Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, mij@osdn.com Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD References: <3ADCF592.8C695855@acuson.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89i In-Reply-To: ; from John Baldwin on Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 07:09:35PM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 2.2.6-RELEASE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 07:09:35PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 18-Apr-01 David Johnson wrote: > > It's more than just not liking the GPL. I don't like the GPL. I think it > > sucks. But mere mentioning of the differences between the BSD and GPL > > licenses is bizarre. My biggest problem with Windriver's GPL statements > > is one of attitude. They bought the *rights* to BSD/OS, so they can do > > whatever they want with it, regardless of its licensing. If they had > > said "we're going to use FreeBSD because of its licensing", that would > > have been well and good. But instead they said "we're going to buy the > > rights to BSD/OS because of its licensing." That just doesn't make > > sense. BSD/OS is not under the BSD license, and FreeBSD is not up for > > sale. > > > > Windriver's actions had nothing at all to do with licensing, but a lot > > to do with casting fear, uncertaintly and doubt upon their Linux > > competitors. > > No, that is incorrect. WindRiver (not WinDriver or Windriver ) > does plan on using at least some FreeBSD technologies in some shape or > another. As they said in their statement, many of the modifications are > in the kernel, and they don't want to open up the source of VxWorks or > Tornado to their competitors, so the BSD license is a bit more to their > liking than the GPL. Please stop spreading FUD. There are some other > issues at hand as well, but suffice it so say that WindRiver is > legitimately interested in BSD moreso than Linux at least partially due > to licensing issues. But WindRiver didn't need to *buy* anything in order to use FreeBSD technologies in their products. That's the whole point of the licence, right? Like David says, the licencing of the BSD/OS code is irrelevant. Of course they also bought some key FreeBSD developers as part of the deal, which will clearly be to their benefit in integrating the BSD technology with their own stuff. Scott -- =========================================================================== Scott Mitchell | PGP Key ID | "Eagles may soar, but weasels Cambridge, England | 0x54B171B9 | don't get sucked into jet engines" scott.mitchell@mail.com | 0xAA775B8B | -- Anon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 1: 3:23 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B963237B424 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:03:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3I832k37384; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:03:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Rahul Siddharthan" Cc: "David Johnson" , Subject: MacOS Themes, was RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:03:01 -0700 Message-ID: <006e01c0c7dd$fd2c1b80$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: Rahul Siddharthan [mailto:rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in] > >Another bit of uneasy news was Apple's threatening a Mac theme editor, >http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=2773 >Note that this is quite different from threatening themes.org: this >editor was for creating themes for *MacOS itself*. > This is fallout from the Napster decision, I wouldn't worry about it, and indeed the entire Napster thing is just a rehash of the lawsuits over the copy protection software that took place back in the 80's. What the problem is, is that companies that have a lot of infringement that takes place against their products, such as graphic design firms, music producers, and the like, have been searching for ways to technologically impede copying of their stuff. They tried in the 80's and failed. Now they are trying again with things like CSS and such. Apple's attempt is to embed the material in the OS and then say that since reverse engineering the OS is illegal, it makes it illegal to copy their material. What all these copyright holders have been seeking for years is either legislation or caselaw in the US that in effect states that an entity that manufactures a device or software that aids in copying material that is technologically impeded from being copied, is aiding and abetting the actual copyright violation, and thus even though they are not actually performing the infringement themselves, they are just as guilty as the actual infringers. If the copyright holders can obtain this legislation or caselaw, they can then put the people that write programs like DeCSS or the Themes editor in jail. Thus, this then makes the technological impedement they have designed actually worthwhile. The problem with Napster, is that they were so blatently and obviously out-and-out aiding and abetting music copyright infringers, (after all, a number of internal company e-mails and testimony was obtained that showed that the Napster people were encouraging people to violate copyrights) that it was possible for the copyright holders to finally get a court to side with their viewpoint, and thus they were able to obtain some case decisions that they can use in future court rulings. Apple, being inspired by this, is going to attempt to jump on the bandwagon and try to get some more rulings. I'm sure a lot of other companies will too. The reason I wouldn't worry about it is that all of this runs afoul of what you would call the "political sanity test" Simply put, Congress isn't going to tolerate the courts putting people in jail for using some copyright-infringing-enabler program (like Themes editor) to modify their own copy of MacOS in their own home as long as they aren't selling the modified MacOS and thereby depriving the copyright holder (Apple) of revenue. Companies like Apple can wring their hands all they want and rattle on about "controlling the presentation of MacOS" but unless they can prove financial harm to themselves, Congress is going to do what the people want, and if the people want Themes for themselves they are going to get Themes for themselves. With Napster, it was easy to see that the major record companies were being deprived of revenue by the existence of Napster. But, nobody is going to believe that Apple is being deprived of revenue just due to the existence of MTE. Nor is anyone going to believe that the major movie houses are being deprived of revenue just because people use DeCSS to view DVD's they bought from the store on their Linux systems. So, even if people like Apple and the Movie studios end up winning their politically stupid lawsuits, all that will happen is the people will complain and Congress will make another exemption in the copyright law (like they had to for photocopiers) and that will be that. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 1:27: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 845E837B423 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:26:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Rahul.Siddharthan@lpt.ens.fr) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f3I8Quq12521 ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:26:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id KAA30929 ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:26:55 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:26:55 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: MacOS Themes, was RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010418102655.E27000@lpt.ens.fr> Mail-Followup-To: Ted Mittelstaedt , David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> <006e01c0c7dd$fd2c1b80$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <006e01c0c7dd$fd2c1b80$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:03:01AM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted Mittelstaedt said on Apr 18, 2001 at 01:03:01: > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Rahul Siddharthan [mailto:rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in] > > > >Another bit of uneasy news was Apple's threatening a Mac theme editor, > >http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=2773 > >Note that this is quite different from threatening themes.org: this > >editor was for creating themes for *MacOS itself*. > > > > This is fallout from the Napster decision, I wouldn't worry about it, > and indeed the entire Napster thing is just a rehash of the lawsuits > over the copy protection software that took place back in the 80's. Whatever. I'm not worried about theme editors for MacOS, but about corporate attitudes in general. Wind River's action about slackware is not very encouraging. In any case, they don't have any kind of known commitment to free software, and (from what I've read about them) no particular motivation for donating anything back to FreeBSD. As such, I'm happy if they hire individual FreeBSD people to help them with their embedded system work, but I am not happy if the FreeBSD OS itself becomes closely associated with such a company -- any more than I would be if Transmeta tried to associate itself with linux (which they don't). People in the linux world complain about the dominance of Red Hat and the popular "RH=linux" misconception, but at least RH's commitment to free software has never been in doubt. - Rahul To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 1:27:39 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43EAE37B422 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:27:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3I8ROk37455; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:27:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Rahul Siddharthan" Cc: "David Johnson" , Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:27:24 -0700 Message-ID: <007201c0c7e1$65489b00$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: Rahul Siddharthan [mailto:rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in] > >I agree that it's difficult, in principle, to fault them for it. >Nevertheless, I was uneasy about the takeover and what it means for >FreeBSD, and this news will make many people uneasy if they weren't >already. Because Wind River's only motivation is to be able to close >the source if they want to. > The BSD/OS source was never open to start with - unless of course you purchased the product, in which case it's source came with BSDI. Now, the BSD source that BSDI itself was based on was open, and you can argue that BSDI was thus open because of that, but that's not really the case. >Consider the following scenario: Apple has a patent on some very >low-level algorithm, but doesn't tell people. (They do claim a patent >on theming, so why not on some OS-related thing?) Their people (no >doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD. The second that an Apple employee formally contributed patented source to FreeBSD, it would tremendously weaken the Apple patent to the point where it would impede it's enforceability. It gets into -current, >then into a stable release, becomes well entrenched into the OS. Then >the legal people at Apple decide that FreeBSD has no right to >distribute this patented stuff for free, and threaten to sue. > It would take a couple years before becoming well entrenched, and if Apple waited that long before doing anything about it, the patent would be virtually unenforceable. Anyway, FreeBSD already went through this with AT&T. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 1:31:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEBD837B422 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:31:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Rahul.Siddharthan@lpt.ens.fr) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f3I8VSq13083 ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:31:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id KAA31151 ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:31:27 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:31:27 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010418103127.F27000@lpt.ens.fr> Mail-Followup-To: Ted Mittelstaedt , David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> <007201c0c7e1$65489b00$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <007201c0c7e1$65489b00$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:27:24AM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted Mittelstaedt said on Apr 18, 2001 at 01:27:24: > >Consider the following scenario: Apple has a patent on some very > >low-level algorithm, but doesn't tell people. (They do claim a patent > >on theming, so why not on some OS-related thing?) Their people (no > >doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD. > > The second that an Apple employee formally contributed patented source > to FreeBSD, it would tremendously weaken the Apple patent to the point > where it would impede it's enforceability. As I understand it (IANAL), non-enforcement of patents doesn't weaken them (unlike trademarks, where you do have to enforce them actively). Unisys waited for years, until GIFs became entrenched standards on the web, before trying to enforce their LZW patent. Many big corporations did pay up. - Rahul To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 2:15:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from sol.cc.u-szeged.hu (sol.cc.u-szeged.hu [160.114.8.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D3B937B422 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 02:15:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sziszi@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu) Received: from petra.hos.u-szeged.hu by sol.cc.u-szeged.hu (8.9.3+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id LAA11476; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 11:15:26 +0200 (MEST) Received: from sziszi by petra.hos.u-szeged.hu with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 14po3a-00013e-00 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 11:15:26 +0200 Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 11:15:26 +0200 From: Szilveszter Adam To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010418111526.A3210@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu> Mail-Followup-To: Szilveszter Adam , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> <006701c0c7d5$65e45c40$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr>; from rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 09:16:52AM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hello, I did not mean to chime in to this thread initially, but now I saw something which resonated with what I feel a bit concerned about wrt this whole commercially-backed-open-source thing, not only necessarily this particular incident. On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 09:16:52AM +0200, Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > Nevertheless, I was uneasy about the takeover and what it means for > FreeBSD, and this news will make many people uneasy if they weren't > already. Because Wind River's only motivation is to be able to close > the source if they want to. While I do not subscribe to conspiracy theory side of the matter (I do not think they would want to "close" the source by "underhand ways" nor can they do it even if they want to) I see a potential problem here. Even though an OpenSource project's code cannot be taken away (one fear that is often voiced and supposedly solved by the GPL, but one fear that just shows how far people are from understanding the way the legal system in general and copyright law in particular works), it is today's reality, that every OpenSource project needs some large backer who will donate hardware, bandwith, employ key deveopers etc if it wants to become even a bit more than just "yet another sexy text editor" on SourceForge. This backer need not necessarily be a company that deals in similar matters as the project itself (like BSDi) need not even be a company at all, but may be a government agency (like the NSA for their Linux distro) or a university etc. While it can be argued that by nature the best sponsors are non-profit entities, and this has been grandly demonstrated by the UCB's commitment to BSD, today most such sponsors are corps, and often corps who want to have something in return ie want this support to "pay off" for their for-profit operations. If one such backer dumps an OpenSource project, be it because of a mergers & acquisitions game or for difference of opinion or whatever, the code remains and the developers have lost nothing in theory. But in practice... unless they can find a new sponsor, the project is as good as dead. Software development on such world-wide scale as is the case with FreeBSD, (but not only) simply requires a world-class infrastructure. It needs the powerful FTP, CVS, cvsup servers, the many mirrors, the direct backbone connectivity, the paid developers. Theoretically the Internet has made everybody equal in that you can start a sw project from a homepage hosted at Geocities, but in practice this approach does not scale, is only suited for one-man-shows. In the Net's infancy, when almost everybody was connected to the Net directly and every node could very well be a server as well as a client, this approach might have been true, but a lot has happened since then. (Unfortunately, if you ask me) What I am nervous about is that by becoming too dependent on the commercial sponsors, you are really at their whim. If you do not have one, you'll end up like NetBSD who have one Wasabi and that's it, or even worse, like OpenBSD, who have nobody and it shows. An uneasy situation and one where it's understandable that people get anxious when news of take-overs and such float around, esp since it wasn't such a long time ago when we had to get accustomed to the WCCDROM/BSDi merger. Just my HUF 0.02... -- Regards: Szilveszter ADAM Szeged University Szeged Hungary To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 3: 6: 6 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from sol.cc.u-szeged.hu (sol.cc.u-szeged.hu [160.114.8.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 123EA37B424 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 03:05:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sziszi@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu) Received: from petra.hos.u-szeged.hu by sol.cc.u-szeged.hu (8.9.3+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id MAA17377; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 12:05:53 +0200 (MEST) Received: from sziszi by petra.hos.u-szeged.hu with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 14poqP-0003I8-00 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 12:05:53 +0200 Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 12:05:53 +0200 From: Szilveszter Adam To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: MacOS Themes, was RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010418120552.D3210@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu> Mail-Followup-To: Szilveszter Adam , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> <006e01c0c7dd$fd2c1b80$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <006e01c0c7dd$fd2c1b80$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:03:01AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:03:01AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > This is fallout from the Napster decision, I wouldn't worry about it, > and indeed the entire Napster thing is just a rehash of the lawsuits > over the copy protection software that took place back in the 80's. While I agree with this, I think the situation is a bit different. Today is some sort of gold-rush on. Although most companies and other entities who stand behind this crazy drive for ever-stiffer copyright laws know full well that this cannot go on indefinetly (sp?), that in the end this will bring innovation to a screeching halt, that it will eventually even slower the economic growth instead of accelerating it, but they hope to have made it rich by then and also hope to have created a playing field with a lot fewer players where they can later confortably play (as in monopolize) This behaviour is utterly unresponsible, needless to say. But it seems to work, for the moment. This will influence law-making in the short and perhaps medium term, even the judicial system cannot be elevated above the society where it operates. The drivers of stiff copy-protection regulation are strong, a whole lot stronger than even thousands of letters to your congresman can be. This is essentially a balancing act: For as long as these regulations "only" hinder you at hacking on your OpenSource (in the eyes of the world a synonim of free) project, or at using your lawfully acquired copy of that latest hit CD in "unapproved" ways (many do not even know that you can play CDs with a computer, so to them a "ripping-protected" CD is not a problem!), decision-makers will not feel that urgent need to do something abt it. Remember, they are surrounded by lobbying groups the whole day, each of which tries to sell "their" cause as something earth-shattering, so they just become sceptical after a while, esp since many of the lobbyists are professionals who work for hire and can sell any cause like that. Judges are no exception either, they see no problem in ruling against somebody who acts "irregularly" unless they do feel that there may be more to this tham it meets the eye. Unfortunately most lawyers are at best neutral towards computers in general and do not appreciate OpenSource or hacking in particular. They are consumers of this technology, they do not care how it is created. But the balance will kip as soon as say, (as I read in the news the other day) they start going after housewives who trade (or better still, traffic in:-) patchwork designs over the Net instead of each buying the magazines for themselves as it was meant to be. Why? Because there a whole lot more housewives doing patchwork or embroidery or whathaveyou than there are OpenSource hackers, and this activity - in contrast to computer-related ones - is not merely tolerated and at best heroized (wow. such word probably doesn't exist, but hey, we just created it) in the news media by persons who don't know jack about what it's about, but a respected pastime. Also, there are many lawyers whose wives do it and they will say: "But I know her, she is not a criminal. This thing cannot be a crime!" This is when the balance kips, and when (possibly) new exceptions are enacted to existing copyright laws, of course provided that the "players" have not yet managed to change peoples' habits to the point where this can be omitted (as in: everybody uses WMA now because it's the default in XP, so the bad old mp3 format can be phased out, and since you cannot do this and this with WMA, no need to allow it either. After some time most people will not even know that such thing was possible at all, they'll just make do with what they have. This why controling information == controling people. You don't know it, you don't miss it.) Just my HUF 0.02... -- Regards: Szilveszter ADAM Szeged University Szeged Hungary To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 8:11:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93C8E37B424 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:11:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3IFBGk38850; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:11:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Rahul Siddharthan" Cc: "David Johnson" , Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:11:15 -0700 Message-ID: <007301c0c819$d03d74c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010418103127.F27000@lpt.ens.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG It's not the non-enforcement of patents that is what weakens them. For example, AT&T's copyrights wern't weakened by inclusion of their code into BSD, thus they had a case to sue UCB. The weakening happens if the copyrighted source has it's copyright changed, which is what would happen if it was contributed to the OS. It used to be that when a company (like Apple) contributed code to a UNIX (like BSD) they were allowed to keep their own copyright on the code and just have it included in the distribution. After the AT&T lawsuit, BSD doesen't allow this anymore. If your a company and you want to contribute your own copyrighted source to FreeBSD, you can only do this via the ports mechanism. (ie: build a port for your stuff) You can not get it into the kernel unless you agree to change the copyright to give BSD perpetual control over it. With the Unisys deal, Unisys never gave permission to change the copyright in LZW. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Rahul >Siddharthan >Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 1:31 AM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: David Johnson; freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > > >Ted Mittelstaedt said on Apr 18, 2001 at 01:27:24: >> >Consider the following scenario: Apple has a patent on some very >> >low-level algorithm, but doesn't tell people. (They do claim a patent >> >on theming, so why not on some OS-related thing?) Their people (no >> >doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD. >> >> The second that an Apple employee formally contributed patented source >> to FreeBSD, it would tremendously weaken the Apple patent to the point >> where it would impede it's enforceability. > >As I understand it (IANAL), non-enforcement of patents doesn't weaken >them (unlike trademarks, where you do have to enforce them actively). >Unisys waited for years, until GIFs became entrenched standards on the >web, before trying to enforce their LZW patent. Many big corporations >did pay up. > >- Rahul > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 8:54:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (Odin.AC.HMC.Edu [134.173.32.75]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D033337B424 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:54:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brdavis@odin.ac.hmc.edu) Received: (from brdavis@localhost) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id f3IFs0t07669; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:54:00 -0700 Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:54:00 -0700 From: Brooks Davis To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: Rahul Siddharthan , David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010418085400.A2824@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> References: <20010418103127.F27000@lpt.ens.fr> <007301c0c819$d03d74c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <007301c0c819$d03d74c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 08:11:15AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 08:11:15AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > It used to be that when a company (like Apple) contributed > code to a UNIX (like BSD) they were allowed to keep their own > copyright on the code and just have it included in the > distribution. After the AT&T lawsuit, BSD doesen't allow this > anymore. If your a company and you want to contribute your > own copyrighted source to FreeBSD, you can only do this via the > ports mechanism. (ie: build a port for your stuff) You can not > get it into the kernel unless you agree to change the copyright > to give BSD perpetual control over it. I think this is misleading. Contributers do generaly maintain their copyright on non-trivial works within the tree (see the Whistle copyright in most any netgraph sources as an example.) FreeBSD generally doesn't require copyright transfer though I believe NetBSD does or at least strongly encourages it. If you want it in the tree, you must generally place it under a BSD compatable license, but the copyright remains yours. -- Brooks --=20 Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 --SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE63biXXY6L6fI4GtQRAurdAJ9s1DPDCSQ+loU9/tJJWgVwbrWo6gCgv8uo 2UmbnovVHqw0fL3J5myWlkw= =SGrO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 10:36:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 159D337B422; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:35:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.47.12]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA1BE3; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:40:53 -0700 Message-ID: <3ADDD05A.9F2BB640@acuson.com> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:35:22 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG John Baldwin wrote: > > Windriver's actions had nothing at all to do with licensing, but a lot > > to do with casting fear, uncertaintly and doubt upon their Linux > > competitors. > > No, that is incorrect. WindRiver (not WinDriver or Windriver ) does plan > on using at least some FreeBSD technologies in some shape or another. But they do not need to buy BSDi in order to use FreeBSD. From my layman reading of the BSD license, you are not required to buy any company in order to use, distribute, modify or profit from FreeBSD. On the other hand, buying BSDi gives you rights to BSD/OS, which is not under the BSD license. WindRiver spent a lot of words talking about why the BSD license allows them to use FreeBSD, but extremely few words on what that had to do with them buying BSDi. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 10:43:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtp01.primenet.com (smtp01.primenet.com [206.165.6.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C43F637B422 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:43:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr02.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA28450; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:41:52 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr02.primenet.com(206.165.6.202) via SMTP by smtp01.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAlWaGh3; Wed Apr 18 10:41:21 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA17086; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:48:19 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104181748.KAA17086@usr02.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD To: tedm@toybox.placo.com (Ted Mittelstaedt) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:48:19 +0000 (GMT) Cc: rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in (Rahul Siddharthan), djohnson@acuson.com (David Johnson), freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <007201c0c7e1$65489b00$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> from "Ted Mittelstaedt" at Apr 18, 2001 01:27:24 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > >Consider the following scenario: Apple has a patent on some very > >low-level algorithm, but doesn't tell people. (They do claim a patent > >on theming, so why not on some OS-related thing?) Their people (no > >doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD. > > The second that an Apple employee formally contributed patented source > to FreeBSD, it would tremendously weaken the Apple patent to the point > where it would impede it's enforceability. Not really. What weakens a patent is distribution of an embodiment of the patent under license, since it grants rights to use the patent, unless they are explicitly disclaimed. In other words, if I put a patented algorithm (let's call a spade a spade here, and not try to call it a process) in code, and stuck a particular license on it, if I had the rights to do that with the patent, it would weaken the patent by the amount that the license permitted use of the patented algorithm. If I didn't have the rights to do that, and was acting on my own, I've granted absolutely no license. For example, SQUID uses algorithms which IBM claims to have patent rights to, and IBM goes out of its way to not ship SQUID with any of its products (going so far as to make Whistle rip it out of the InterJet II and replace it with Apache's cache). The Apache cache contains some of the same algortihms, but because there is no grant of license to the source code when you purchase the product, there is no grant of license to use the patent, and IBM is OK with that. > >It gets into -current, > >then into a stable release, becomes well entrenched into the OS. Then > >the legal people at Apple decide that FreeBSD has no right to > >distribute this patented stuff for free, and threaten to sue. > > It would take a couple years before becoming well entrenched, and if Apple > waited that long before doing anything about it, the patent would be > virtually unenforceable. Anyway, FreeBSD already went through this > with AT&T. A patent is not like a Trade Secret. It is enforcible until it expires. An historical common practice was to file for a patent, but not execute on the filing until someone came along and actually figured out a way to make money from what was patented. When that happened, the execution occurred, and the patent was then good for 7 or 14 years from date of issue. This was expanded to 17 years by treaty with Europe and other countries, which have absurdly long patent durations (a gamble that they can come up with a basic technology, and regain their status as superpowers, apparently). Such patents are called "submerged patents". They don't surface until someone starts making money off the idea, and then the company that surfaces them demands a cut of the profits (they start by demanding all of the profits, and negotiate from there). Recently, the term of patents was changed to 20 years from date of filing, rather than 17 years from date of issue, in an attempt to "deal with" submerged patents (once again, Europeans caused the length of term of a patent to be extended). These days, companies just keep information to themselves (the U.S. allows patents upt to 1 year following publication, but no more than that, and by treaty, the WIPO respects these delayed patents internationally). When someone starts to make money, that person usually files a patent, then the company that had the information does the same, and demonstrates "prior art", thus stealing the patent via trade secret prior art, so they really haven't gotten rid of submerged patents, what they've done is forced companies to be less forthcoming in their data publication (exactly the opposite of the intent of the basis of intellectual property law in the U.S. Constitution). In any case, what this boils down to is that they could sue anyone using FreeBSD who happened to end up having deep pockets, and collect for any use of the patented algorithm up to 20 years minus one day from their filing date, unless you could demostrate that they themselves licensed the patent to you. P.S.: The reason for the nominal fee on the source licenses from SCO and Sun is to ensure that the license is valid and limited by contract, since a valid contract requires the exchange of consideration. This is the same argument that UCB used to yank the Net/2 distribution as part of the USL/UCB settlement agreement, since if you did not pay for the distribution, there was no consideration, and without the consideration, they could void the license, even if there were no explict contractual clause permitting voiding. P.P.S.: This is also why Apple insisted on paying a token amount to UCSD for rights to use their P-system. When UCSD decided that it had value and removed it from distribution, they were unable to voide Apple's license, since consideration had been given to UCSD for Apple's license. Apple still has the only non-revokable license to the UCSD P-system. Unless you count JAVA as the successor to it, of course. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 10:52:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtp10.phx.gblx.net (smtp10.phx.gblx.net [206.165.6.140]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A50A37B423; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:52:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr02.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp10.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA22724; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:52:48 -0700 Received: from usr02.primenet.com(206.165.6.202) via SMTP by smtp10.phx.gblx.net, id smtpdlbpgqa; Wed Apr 18 10:52:44 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA17199; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:58:16 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104181758.KAA17199@usr02.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD To: djohnson@acuson.com (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:58:16 +0000 (GMT) Cc: jhb@FreeBSD.ORG (John Baldwin), freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <3ADDD05A.9F2BB640@acuson.com> from "David Johnson" at Apr 18, 2001 10:35:22 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > But they do not need to buy BSDi in order to use FreeBSD. From my layman > reading of the BSD license, you are not required to buy any company in > order to use, distribute, modify or profit from FreeBSD. On the other > hand, buying BSDi gives you rights to BSD/OS, which is not under the BSD > license. > > WindRiver spent a lot of words talking about why the BSD license allows > them to use FreeBSD, but extremely few words on what that had to do with > them buying BSDi. Did you listen in on the conference call? The only thing that was troubling to me was that, on the conference call, Jordan once again defended not releasing the FreeBSD trademark to the FreeBSD Foundation. The defense was that there was legal muscle required to be able to defend the trademark (and this was the same excuse given for the non-transfer by Walnut Creek CDROM, and again for the non-transfer by BSDI). In its almost 10 year history, there has not been one incident of the trademark being defended or needing defense against misuse. In addition, nothing prevents donation of legal services for defense, should the need arise, and, in fact, such donations, made to a 503C tax-exempt charity, like the FreeBSD Foundation, would be tax dedutible for the company(s) or individual(s) donating them. Buying BSDI did give them control of the FreeBSD trademark; this isn't to say that they will abuse this control in order to keep FreeBSD from impinging on their embedded systems market (a place where FreeBSD is more and more frequently used to push past startup costs, and to get around OS inflexibilty that comes with "one size fits all" binary only distributions). If it came down to it, the FreeBSD project could survive much better than Linux, in a similar situation, since so many of us have full copies of the historical source repository, back to day one, but it's possible that we would not be able to call the resulting software "FreeBSD". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 10:54:10 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from meow.osd.bsdi.com (meow.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.88]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0A9B37B424 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:54:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (john@jhb-laptop.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.241]) by meow.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f3IHs0G51748; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:54:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3ADDD05A.9F2BB640@acuson.com> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:53:22 -0700 (PDT) From: John Baldwin To: David Johnson Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 18-Apr-01 David Johnson wrote: > John Baldwin wrote: > >> > Windriver's actions had nothing at all to do with licensing, but a lot >> > to do with casting fear, uncertaintly and doubt upon their Linux >> > competitors. >> >> No, that is incorrect. WindRiver (not WinDriver or Windriver ) does >> plan >> on using at least some FreeBSD technologies in some shape or another. > > But they do not need to buy BSDi in order to use FreeBSD. From my layman > reading of the BSD license, you are not required to buy any company in > order to use, distribute, modify or profit from FreeBSD. On the other > hand, buying BSDi gives you rights to BSD/OS, which is not under the BSD > license. No they do not. They do have FreeBSD developers that they can use to help further technologies in FreeBSD that they may use internally, however. If I develop some neat foo-flapper algorithm in FreeBSD, then they can use it in VxWorks or eBSD or whatever without worry as it will be BSDL'd. If they are paying someone to do GPL'd code, they can't pull the code back inside. "But you could have the author relicense the code for internal use." This doesn't work when your employee is working on a group project with people outside of the company. -- John Baldwin -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 11:28:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-63-207-60-27.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [63.207.60.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A630B37B43C for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 11:28:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DC1B966F16; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 11:28:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 11:28:30 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: Rahul Siddharthan , David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010418112830.A36122@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20010418103127.F27000@lpt.ens.fr> <007301c0c819$d03d74c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <007301c0c819$d03d74c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 08:11:15AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 08:11:15AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > It used to be that when a company (like Apple) contributed > code to a UNIX (like BSD) they were allowed to keep their own > copyright on the code and just have it included in the > distribution. After the AT&T lawsuit, BSD doesen't allow this > anymore. If your a company and you want to contribute your > own copyrighted source to FreeBSD, you can only do this via the > ports mechanism. (ie: build a port for your stuff) You can not > get it into the kernel unless you agree to change the copyright > to give BSD perpetual control over it. FreeBSD doesn't require copyright transfer of donated code. Kris --mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE63dzOWry0BWjoQKURAhIrAJ9g0aDpjWCh6GfAVQ/07o+MaW0wSACgkDDv ikaWk2zcJxPTVFgAd2hQL0s= =pNLq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 12:31: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from ra.upan.org (ra.upan.org [204.107.76.19]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465F937B423 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 12:30:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mikel@ocsinternet.com) Received: from ocsinternet.com (thoth.upan.org [204.107.76.16]) by ra.upan.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3IJSsZ10617; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 15:28:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mikel@ocsinternet.com) Message-ID: <3ADDED24.1649A20@ocsinternet.com> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 15:38:12 -0400 From: Mikel X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,it MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rahul Siddharthan Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt , David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> <006701c0c7d5$65e45c40$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG This secnario begs the question: Should the BPL be modified to include verbiage regarding, protecting FreeBSD from such poison patent issues? Something that absolves fBSD from liabilities for using donated code which may include these poison patents? Cheers, Mikel Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > Ted Mittelstaedt said on Apr 18, 2001 at 00:01:31: > > In every corporate acquisition there's always bits that don't > > fit and eventually get cut off. This is a natural part of > > this process. > > > > The fact is that it's illegal to buy and sell people like cattle, > > and while you can buy and sell products all you want, your > > never guarenteed that just because you buy a product that > > all the employees are going to choose to go to work for you. > > This is a difficult problem for software companies particularly, > > since most of the company's value is in the butts of the people > > warming the chairs in the cubicles, not in the end results of > > those folks. > > > > I think that you can't fault Windriver for this, because their > > only legal option was to sell the Slackware product to someone, > > I agree that it's difficult, in principle, to fault them for it. > Nevertheless, I was uneasy about the takeover and what it means for > FreeBSD, and this news will make many people uneasy if they weren't > already. Because Wind River's only motivation is to be able to close > the source if they want to. > > Another bit of uneasy news was Apple's threatening a Mac theme editor, > http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=2773 > Note that this is quite different from threatening themes.org: this > editor was for creating themes for *MacOS itself*. > > FreeBSD people justify the ability of Apple, Wind River et al to > commercialise BSD, by saying that these companies do contribute back > to the original source. Maybe individual people at Apple play nice, > but Apple the company has never played nice. Their hardware has > always been closed; they sued Microsoft for Windows, claiming it > copies their GUI (which they themselves had lifted from Xerox); they > have recently been claiming the idea of theming. > > Consider the following scenario: Apple has a patent on some very > low-level algorithm, but doesn't tell people. (They do claim a patent > on theming, so why not on some OS-related thing?) Their people (no > doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD. It gets into -current, > then into a stable release, becomes well entrenched into the OS. Then > the legal people at Apple decide that FreeBSD has no right to > distribute this patented stuff for free, and threaten to sue. > > I'm not being paranoid here. People may individually play nice, but > one should never assume that corporations will play nice. Or that, if > they're playing nice today, they will play nice tomorrow. Their > personality depends entirely on who's in charge. It's the money, and > the money only. > > While Wind River is not Apple, it seems to me that they too would have > a motivation for trying to close FreeBSD, perhaps through some such > underhand way. If they contribute any really useful technology to the > system, they would not want other companies to be able to make use of > it. > > - Rahul. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 14: 8:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from ra.upan.org (ra.upan.org [204.107.76.19]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CFFB37B43C for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 14:08:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mikel@ocsinternet.com) Received: from ocsinternet.com (thoth.upan.org [204.107.76.16]) by ra.upan.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3IL7wZ11083 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:07:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mikel@ocsinternet.com) Message-ID: <3ADE045C.3B9304D8@ocsinternet.com> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:17:16 -0400 From: Mikel X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,it MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Of course this issue does concern all of us who advocate the various uses of fBSD. And in as much as I doubt that much will occur to change the free usage of fBSD or even the free access to resources relating to fBSD. I feel quite confident that we as a community will come together and make what ever resources available that would be required to maintain the myriad of web, cvs, and ftp servers. I am absolutely sure that there we are an amazingly resilient community, and that we will not let fBSD be diverted, nor abused... I can guarantee that if things were to dissolve between the fBSD crew and IX Systems, there would be no shortage of offers for co-location space, connectivity and the like so that the fBSD project will continue on. I know of one concrete offer already and the project need say the word and it will be done. Cheers, Mikel David Johnson wrote: > Today's announcement of the abandonment of Slackware caught me by > surprise. All Slackware employees laid off. Slackware was *profitable* > for Walnut Creek and BSDi. I think they've lost more in good will than > they will gain. That, plus some blatant GPL baiting, makes Windriver > pretty slimy. > > So, how is FreeBSD going to fare? Will they be canned as well? Will they > try to distance themselves from Windriver? I think it would serve > Windriver right if Slackware, FreeBSD and the ftp.freesoftware.com > people upped, left, and started over with their own company. > > David > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 14:41:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtp03.primenet.com (smtp03.primenet.com [206.165.6.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 672A437B423 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 14:41:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr08.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp03.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA00693; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 14:41:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp03.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAZyaOtb; Wed Apr 18 14:41:05 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA11291; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 14:41:26 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104182141.OAA11291@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD To: mikel@ocsinternet.com (Mikel) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 21:41:25 +0000 (GMT) Cc: rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in (Rahul Siddharthan), tedm@toybox.placo.com (Ted Mittelstaedt), djohnson@acuson.com (David Johnson), freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <3ADDED24.1649A20@ocsinternet.com> from "Mikel" at Apr 18, 2001 03:38:12 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > This secnario begs the question: Should the BPL be modified to include > verbiage regarding, protecting FreeBSD from such poison patent issues? > Something that absolves fBSD from liabilities for using donated code which > may include these poison patents? This is a very common approach to the problem. Most of the Apple, Mozilla, etc. people have that in their license. The problem is that contributions are not really derivative works in FreeBSD, not does FreeBSD seek to control them as such. Unless there was an explicit assignment of rights to the FreeBSD Foundation (I could actually get behind this, if the trademark isse went away: it was how CSRG operated), there would really be no way to ensure that the rights being assigned belonged to the contributor instead of someone else. Software patents are almost impossible to audit to protect yourself; generally you only get to find out when you are sued. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 18: 5:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nwlynx.network-lynx.net (nwlynx.network-lynx.net [63.122.185.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8007F37B422 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 18:05:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Don@Silver-Lynx.com) Received: from Silver-Lynx.com (doze-1.network-lynx.net [63.122.185.106]) by nwlynx.network-lynx.net (8.11.1/8.9.3/Who.Cares) with ESMTP id f3J15O874255; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:05:24 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from Don@Silver-Lynx.com) Message-ID: <3ADE39C6.97D24F69@Silver-Lynx.com> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:05:10 -0600 From: Don Wilde X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jgrosch@mooseriver.com Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> <20010417174700.A79803@mooseriver.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Josef Grosch wrote: > Source people. Lord knows with WindRivers licensing and pricing structure > they are going to need all the good karma points they can get. > That's for sure, Josef. They're as brutal as they come for payware terms. After all, their prime market was our (taxpayers') pocketbook. With the end of the Cold War, a lot of their high dollar contracts have vanished, but for years they commanded a very high price indeed for their toolset. Time will indeed tell. Fortunately, core has the ability to tell WR to hike whenever they want. We might lose one mirror-cycle's worth of changes, but FreeBSD caannot be held hostage by anybody. Bought perhaps, but I very much doubt Jordan or any of the other key players would suborn their own baby. They believe too much in the viability of FreeBSD as a long-term plus to allow somebody with a personal agenda to pervert the main threads of development. We've seen several attempts to do that already, and FreeBSD still looks awfully healthy to me. We will see spin-offs, perhaps, but I think it unlikely that WR will expose much of their code to us. As for knowledge flowing the other way, that's why people like Jordan get on company payrolls and we like that. That's what the BSD license is all about, is people having expertise that's valuable to employers because BSD is reaally useful stuff. We want employers to employ developers, and if they'd rather our people work for them rather than putting our salary time towards the Project, we're still ahead of the game. core will still code; it's in their brain stem cells. As for Slackware, it's up to their guys to cut the mustard. Right? I mean, if it's a viable project other contributors will step up and development will go forward. It's all too easy to forget that the concept of employing open source developers to work on _anything_ was far-fetched, let alone working on an OS on company time. Linux guys have a tendency to get angry about almost anything these days. Relax, it just means we'll outlive them. :-) -- Don Wilde Don@Silver-Lynx.com Silver Lynx Embedded Microsystems Architects 2218 Southern Bl. Ste. 12 Rio Rancho, NM 87124 505-891-4175 FAX 891-4185 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 23:21:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C050137B42C for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:21:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3J6Krk41135; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:20:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Terry Lambert" Cc: "Rahul Siddharthan" , "David Johnson" , Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:20:51 -0700 Message-ID: <004d01c0c898$e1f9c2c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <200104181748.KAA17086@usr02.primenet.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Terry Lambert > > >> >Consider the following scenario: Apple has a patent on some very >> >low-level algorithm, but doesn't tell people. (They do claim a patent >> >on theming, so why not on some OS-related thing?) Their people (no >> >doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD. >> >> The second that an Apple employee formally contributed patented source >> to FreeBSD, it would tremendously weaken the Apple patent to the point >> where it would impede it's enforceability. > >Not really. What weakens a patent is distribution of an >embodiment of the patent under license, since it grants rights to >use the patent, unless they are explicitly disclaimed. > This is what I meant by saying "formally contributed patented source" ie: I meant a formal contribution as one in which the copyright is assigned to the FreeBSD (or whatever) distribution. I'd assume that the Apple employee making the copyright assignment (or extending permission to use the patent under license) claims to have authority to make such a deal. As you state, an Apple employee that just makes an ad-hoc contribution of source, without identifying that it's patented by Apple, is not granting rights to Apple's patent. >> >> It would take a couple years before becoming well entrenched, >and if Apple >> waited that long before doing anything about it, the patent would be >> virtually unenforceable. Anyway, FreeBSD already went through this >> with AT&T. > >A patent is not like a Trade Secret. It is enforcible until it >expires. > I think that specifically, what you mean is that the patent _has value_ insofar as the relationship between the patent holder and the licensee is contractual and that contract is what is enforcible for the life of the patent. The issue I was attempting to point out (and didn't do a good job of it, obviously) is the grey area where, for example an Apple employee makes a formal contribution of Apple's patented source (ie: a copyright assignment, or you could also call it a contractual relationship of sorts) to FreeBSD, then years later Apple's lawyers come up out of the sewer and say "Hey, so and so had no authority to grant that license, and so therefore you have no permission to use the algorithem" This is where I think something like this could become unenforceable, because if the FreeBSD Project were to go before a court and show documentation that the Apple developer that made the copyright assignment could be reasonable expected to have such authority at Apple, it would really throw a wrench in Apple's attempt to revoke the permission. I think that further most courts would take the attitude that it wasn't the FreeBSD Project's responsibility to be familiar with Apple's internal corporate procedures on who has signing authority and who does not, and who has authority to speak for the company and who does not. > >These days, companies just keep information to themselves (the >U.S. allows patents upt to 1 year following publication, but no >more than that, and by treaty, the WIPO respects these delayed >patents internationally). When someone starts to make money, >that person usually files a patent, then the company that had >the information does the same, and demonstrates "prior art", >thus stealing the patent via trade secret prior art, so they >really haven't gotten rid of submerged patents, what they've >done is forced companies to be less forthcoming in their data >publication (exactly the opposite of the intent of the basis of >intellectual property law in the U.S. Constitution). > Yes, there is now an entire cottage industry that is being created of people that do nothing but attempt to dig up prior art examples of stuff that people are attempting to either patent, or overturn the patent on. :-( >In any case, what this boils down to is that they could sue >anyone using FreeBSD who happened to end up having deep pockets, I'd then assume that the FreeBSD user could then turn around and sue the FreeBSD distributors for presenting FreeBSD as an unencumbered distribution, when in reality it had encumbered code in it. >and collect for any use of the patented algorithm up to 20 years >minus one day from their filing date, unless you could demonstrate >that they themselves licensed the patent to you. Yes, this is the key to the whole debate - going back to Rahul's original supposition, the $64 question is does: "Their people (no doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD." constitute a licensing of the patent to FreeBSD. Untimately I think that the boiled down scenario you are describing isn't complete, since if any patent holder tried to do that it would immediately turn into a fight between The FreeBSD Project and the patent holder. What a mess. I cannot imagine a scenario that would be worse for the patent holder from a public relations standpoint. Of course, it does appear that most people who are attempting to enforce software patents these days are market-losers. > >P.S.: The reason for the nominal fee on the source licenses from >SCO and Sun is to ensure that the license is valid and limited >by contract, since a valid contract requires the exchange of >consideration. Yes, however I belive that the consideration doesen't have to be monetary, it could take the form of an exchange of patent rights, for example. >This is the same argument that UCB used to yank >the Net/2 distribution as part of the USL/UCB settlement >agreement, since if you did not pay for the distribution, there >was no consideration, and without the consideration, they could >void the license, even if there were no explict contractual >clause permitting voiding. > >P.P.S.: This is also why Apple insisted on paying a token amount >to UCSD for rights to use their P-system. When UCSD decided that >it had value and removed it from distribution, they were unable >to voide Apple's license, since consideration had been given to >UCSD for Apple's license. Apple still has the only non-revokable >license to the UCSD P-system. Unless you count JAVA as the >successor to it, of course. > Cool - I hope that UCSD wasted a lot of money on lawyers only to be told that in a court. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 23:47:58 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 276A237B424 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:47:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3J6lWk41184; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:47:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Kris Kennaway" Cc: "Rahul Siddharthan" , "David Johnson" , Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:47:31 -0700 Message-ID: <006601c0c89c$9b9a2dc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010418112830.A36122@xor.obsecurity.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: Kris Kennaway [mailto:kris@obsecurity.org] >Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 11:29 AM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: Rahul Siddharthan; David Johnson; freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD > > >On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 08:11:15AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > >> It used to be that when a company (like Apple) contributed >> code to a UNIX (like BSD) they were allowed to keep their own >> copyright on the code and just have it included in the >> distribution. After the AT&T lawsuit, BSD doesen't allow this >> anymore. If your a company and you want to contribute your >> own copyrighted source to FreeBSD, you can only do this via the >> ports mechanism. (ie: build a port for your stuff) You can not >> get it into the kernel unless you agree to change the copyright >> to give BSD perpetual control over it. > >FreeBSD doesn't require copyright transfer of donated code. > FreeBSD does not use kernel code that carries a copyright that is not BSD-like, ie: a license that basically gives everyone permission to do whatever the hell they want with the code. Actually, the entire BSD licensing thing is getting a bit silly since I don't think that the actual University of California, Berkeley, has paid much attention to FreeBSD or any of the BSD's since they dissolved CSRG. More and more, the term "BSD License" is being used to indicate a license that is unrestrictive, ie: Not GNU, rather than an actual assignment of copyright to the Regents of the University of California, Berkeley. Now, different _applications_ in the distribution are a different matter - in my opinion the C compiler (gcc) is probably one of the biggest problems, kind of like the pink elephant that everyone pretends isn't there. It's a shame because at one time BSD did have it's own C compiler. I don't know if it ever crossed over into the FreeBSD distribution but I've always thought it a shame that we have to depend on GNU software for this task. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 18 23:51:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C27537B424; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:51:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3J6p5k41198; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:51:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Terry Lambert" , "David Johnson" Cc: "John Baldwin" , Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:51:05 -0700 Message-ID: <006f01c0c89d$1b1ed500$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <200104181758.KAA17199@usr02.primenet.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Terry Lambert > >If it came down to it, the FreeBSD project could survive much >better than Linux, in a similar situation, since so many of us >have full copies of the historical source repository, back to >day one, but it's possible that we would not be able to call >the resulting software "FreeBSD". > > Well, we could always go back to using "386BSD" since William Jolitz did eventually relent and agree to allow use of that trademark on the result of the patchkit merger and his port (which was named FreeBSD) It would definitely help heal an old wound in the movement. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 0:15:29 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from pilchuck.reedmedia.net (pilchuck.reedmedia.net [63.145.197.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8785237B422 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:15:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from reed@reedmedia.net) Received: from reed by pilchuck.reedmedia.net with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 14q8ew-0005ae-00; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:15:22 -0700 Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:15:21 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jeremy C. Reed" To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: free C compiler? (was RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD) In-Reply-To: <006601c0c89c$9b9a2dc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > Now, different _applications_ in the distribution are a different matter - > in my opinion the C compiler (gcc) is probably one of the biggest problems, > kind of like the pink elephant that everyone pretends isn't there. It's > a shame because at one time BSD did have it's own C compiler. I don't know > if it > ever crossed over into the FreeBSD distribution but I've always thought it a > shame that we have to depend on GNU software for this task. Any ideas where I can find a working free (maybe BSD-licensed) C compiler? Preprocessor? Assembler? Linker? I'd be glad to use a free cc to build my own projects and try to build parts of a BSD source tree. (It looks like 386bsd and I think 4.4BSD-Lite uses gcc.) Jeremy C. Reed http://www.reedmedia.net/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 0:40:49 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-63-207-60-27.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [63.207.60.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5134A37B424 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:40:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7769166B38; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:40:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:40:45 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: Kris Kennaway , Rahul Siddharthan , David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010419004045.A44949@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20010418112830.A36122@xor.obsecurity.org> <006601c0c89c$9b9a2dc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="17pEHd4RhPHOinZp" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <006601c0c89c$9b9a2dc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:47:31PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --17pEHd4RhPHOinZp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:47:31PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > >> It used to be that when a company (like Apple) contributed > >> code to a UNIX (like BSD) they were allowed to keep their own > >> copyright on the code and just have it included in the > >> distribution. After the AT&T lawsuit, BSD doesen't allow this > >> anymore. If your a company and you want to contribute your > >> own copyrighted source to FreeBSD, you can only do this via the > >> ports mechanism. (ie: build a port for your stuff) You can not > >> get it into the kernel unless you agree to change the copyright > >> to give BSD perpetual control over it. > > > >FreeBSD doesn't require copyright transfer of donated code. > > >=20 > FreeBSD does not use kernel code that carries a copyright that is > not BSD-like, ie: a license that basically gives everyone > permission to do whatever the hell they want with the code. Copyright !=3D license agreement Kris --17pEHd4RhPHOinZp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE63pZ8Wry0BWjoQKURAsR7AKC5dfKR2EHjNsGPMEBZXkZmiIWbTACg0bWH n2gfZnIGLNdTMJagEKmKvoU= =H9Zn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --17pEHd4RhPHOinZp-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 0:55:56 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from klapaucius.zer0.org (klapaucius.zer0.org [204.152.186.45]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCF8237B42C for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:55:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gsutter@zer0.org) Received: by klapaucius.zer0.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 9CEA5239A6E; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:55:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:55:53 -0700 From: Gregory Sutter To: Mikel Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010419005553.B36969@klapaucius.zer0.org> References: <3ADCDCA7.A01F5F40@acuson.com> <3ADE045C.3B9304D8@ocsinternet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3ADE045C.3B9304D8@ocsinternet.com>; from mikel@ocsinternet.com on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 05:17:16PM -0400 Organization: Zer0 X-Purpose: For great justice! Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 2001-04-18 17:17 -0400, Mikel wrote: > > I can guarantee that if things were to dissolve between the fBSD crew and IX > Systems, there would be no shortage of offers for co-location space, > connectivity and the like so that the fBSD project will continue on. I know > of one concrete offer already and the project need say the word and it will > be done. IX Systems doesn't provide those, or any other (AFAIK) service for the FreeBSD Project. Colo, bandwidth, and some hardware are provided by Yahoo!. Your sentiment is perfectly correct, though. Greg -- Gregory S. Sutter Only two things are infinite, the mailto:gsutter@zer0.org universe and human stupidity, and I'm http://www.zer0.org/~gsutter/ not sure about the former. hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net/0x845DFEDD - Albert Einstein To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 1: 3:38 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3B837B422 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:03:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3J83Jk41397; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:03:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Jeremy C. Reed" , Subject: RE: free C compiler? (was RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:03:18 -0700 Message-ID: <008c01c0c8a7$31cd36c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Jeremy C. Reed > >Any ideas where I can find a working free (maybe BSD-licensed) C compiler? >Preprocessor? >Assembler? >Linker? > none at all. What you might be able to do is go find an old VAX BSD distribution and attempt to port the C compiler from there to FreeBSD. It would probably make an interesting Masters thesis project for someone. But, your going to end up with a compiler that's truly archaic, non-ANSI C, and isn't going to be able to compile any modern code. Plus that, the K&R C compiler in the original BSD UNIX system can certainly be traced all the way back to the original Bell Labs UNIX and it's compiler, so any old compiler you find is probably stuffed with encumbered code anyway. By the time that any fruits of a project like that would be usable, you could have started from scratch with less effort. >I'd be glad to use a free cc to build my own projects and try to build >parts of a BSD source tree. > To come up with anything like gcc would take an enormous amount of work over years and years, I just don't think that we are going to see this anytime soon. The best hope would be if some commercial operation were to release their compiler into the public domain. But, I think that most commercial UNIX compilers trace their roots back to the original SYSV compiler. Even gcc originated from there but mainly the ideas, Stallman took pains to ensure that no actual code was carried from the old compiler into gcc. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 1:14:41 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 574FD37B43C for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:14:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3J8EFk41415; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:14:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Kris Kennaway" Cc: "Rahul Siddharthan" , "David Johnson" , Subject: RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:14:15 -0700 Message-ID: <009f01c0c8a8$b982ec80$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010419004045.A44949@xor.obsecurity.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Kris Kennaway >> >> FreeBSD does not use kernel code that carries a copyright that is >> not BSD-like, ie: a license that basically gives everyone >> permission to do whatever the hell they want with the code. > >Copyright != license agreement > Quite correct, I'm very aware of this as a writer. :-) Let me just plead, though, that it's traditional in software source to delinate the license in the same place as a statement of copyright is made, most people don't understand or care about the difference. (perhaps they should, though) A software patent is also different than a copyright and a license too. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 1:43: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from casimir.physics.purdue.edu (casimir.physics.purdue.edu [128.210.146.111]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E40E37B422 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:42:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from will@physics.purdue.edu) Received: by casimir.physics.purdue.edu (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5AFDD1BD72; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 03:40:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 03:40:32 -0500 From: Will Andrews To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: "Jeremy C. Reed" , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: free C compiler? (was RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD) Message-ID: <20010419034032.X5017@casimir.physics.purdue.edu> Reply-To: Will Andrews References: <008c01c0c8a7$31cd36c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="k8F/Wr0K7BJP4ItN" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: <008c01c0c8a7$31cd36c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:03:18AM -0700 X-Operating-System: Linux 2.2.18 sparc64 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --k8F/Wr0K7BJP4ItN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:03:18AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > none at all. What you might be able to do is go find an old VAX BSD Actually, not true. TenDRA exists, with a license that appears BSDL-ish. Its C compiler seems to work... the C++ side seems icky though. TenDRA's website: http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~patrykz/TenDRA/ package available: pkg_add -r TenDRA or port: ports/lang/TenDRA --=20 wca --k8F/Wr0K7BJP4ItN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE63qR/F47idPgWcsURAn6pAJ9L722s4ik5gSAQ6imFqlginQQQEgCeKvz5 iw1OoHcXcqGthfQ5Oxsr8VM= =mysS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --k8F/Wr0K7BJP4ItN-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 1:56:30 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD16837B42C for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:56:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3J8uDk41511; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:56:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Szilveszter Adam" , Subject: Funding large Open Source projects (was Windriver, Slackware) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:56:13 -0700 Message-ID: <00a701c0c8ae$95f80ce0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010418111526.A3210@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Szilveszter Adam > > it is today's reality, >that every OpenSource project needs some large backer who will donate >hardware, bandwith, employ key deveopers etc if it wants to become even a >bit more than just "yet another sexy text editor" on SourceForge. How many "bit more than sexy text editor on SourceForge" Open Source projects are really out there? It doesen't seem like there are that many, less if you subtract the innumerable Linux distributions. It seems like maybe less than 50. > >If one such backer dumps an OpenSource project, be it because of a mergers >& acquisitions game or for difference of opinion or whatever, the code >remains and the developers have lost nothing in theory. But in practice... >unless they can find a new sponsor, the project is as good as dead. Only the large Open Source projects would be affected. >Software development on such world-wide scale as is the case with FreeBSD, >(but not only) simply requires a world-class infrastructure. It needs the >powerful FTP, CVS, cvsup servers, the many mirrors, the direct backbone >connectivity, the paid developers. Does it really? I really wonder about that. > >What I am nervous about is that by becoming too dependent on the commercial >sponsors, you are really at their whim. If you do not have one, you'll end >up like NetBSD who have one Wasabi and that's it, or even worse, like >OpenBSD, who have nobody and it shows. An uneasy situation and one where >it's understandable that people get anxious when news of take-overs and >such float around, esp since it wasn't such a long time ago when we had to >get accustomed to the WCCDROM/BSDi merger. > While there's a lot of truth to what you say, I think that there's one fact that can't be ignored - the big chunks of support are going into developer salaries, and into distribution site infrastructure. The CVS servers really don't consume a tremendous amount of bandwidth, if just the comitters have access to them. It doesen't seem as though a few servers are going to represent much of a burden to anyone, and that you could easily get support from most ISP's for that. WHat it seems to me really sucks the bandwidth is the distribution FTP servers. Thus, that is where most of the corporate support is going to flow. Of course, you need people to run these servers and so even more support is needed for salaries and such. But, is it really essential to the world-class development infrastructure to have an FTP server that 4K simultaneous users can hit? Perhaps convincing more people to buy distributions instead of pulling the entire thing down over the Internet would go a long way towards funding the development and getting rid of our dependence on a single corporate sponsor to host the Project. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 2:21:38 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC2EE37B423 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 02:21:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3J9LUk41981; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 02:21:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Will Andrews" Cc: "Jeremy C. Reed" , Subject: RE: free C compiler? (was RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 02:21:30 -0700 Message-ID: <00af01c0c8b2$1e4a65e0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010419034032.X5017@casimir.physics.purdue.edu> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ah, I was just responding to his question asking if I had any ideas about another free compiler. I didn't which is what I answered. I wasn't saying that none existed. TenDRA appears to be an implementation that is pretty far along which is good for what he was wanting to try doing. I did notice that it's main distribution site is offline, though. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Will Andrews >Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 1:41 AM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: Jeremy C. Reed; freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: free C compiler? (was RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD) > > >On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:03:18AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: >> none at all. What you might be able to do is go find an old VAX BSD > >Actually, not true. TenDRA exists, with a license that appears BSDL-ish. >Its C compiler seems to work... the C++ side seems icky though. > >TenDRA's website: http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~patrykz/TenDRA/ >package available: pkg_add -r TenDRA >or port: ports/lang/TenDRA > >-- >wca > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 3:20:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from sol.cc.u-szeged.hu (sol.cc.u-szeged.hu [160.114.8.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73E6337B423 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 03:20:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sziszi@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu) Received: from petra.hos.u-szeged.hu by sol.cc.u-szeged.hu (8.9.3+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id MAA12244; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:19:44 +0200 (MEST) Received: from sziszi by petra.hos.u-szeged.hu with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 14qBXL-0004WE-00 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:19:43 +0200 Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:19:43 +0200 From: Szilveszter Adam To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Funding large Open Source projects (was Windriver, Slackware) Message-ID: <20010419121942.A15266@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu> Mail-Followup-To: Szilveszter Adam , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20010418111526.A3210@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu> <00a701c0c8ae$95f80ce0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <00a701c0c8ae$95f80ce0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:56:13AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hello Ted, On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:56:13AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > How many "bit more than sexy text editor on SourceForge" Open Source > projects > are really out there? It doesen't seem like there are that many, less if > you > subtract the innumerable Linux distributions. It seems like maybe less than > 50. I agree. > >If one such backer dumps an OpenSource project, be it because of a mergers > >& acquisitions game or for difference of opinion or whatever, the code > >remains and the developers have lost nothing in theory. But in practice... > >unless they can find a new sponsor, the project is as good as dead. > > Only the large Open Source projects would be affected. That's true, but that was the whole point:-) After all, if for some reason a disk crash takes down all of the remnants of your "sexy text editor" project at a free web hoster, you can still quite easily recover from it and the world won't be that badly shaken, either:-) But if a large project is forced to disappear from the face of the Net, than it is bound to have repercussions. I was only focusing on larger projects (although I did not make this clear initially) because they are the ones having any considerable impact on the lives of the community other than its authors. Also, this just served to point out that while you might believe that "the bigger the better protected" this is not always true... > >Software development on such world-wide scale as is the case with FreeBSD, > >(but not only) simply requires a world-class infrastructure. It needs the > >powerful FTP, CVS, cvsup servers, the many mirrors, the direct backbone > >connectivity, the paid developers. > > Does it really? I really wonder about that. About which part? All of them?:-) (I think I know what you mean, see below) > While there's a lot of truth to what you say, I think that there's one fact > that > can't be ignored - the big chunks of support are going into developer > salaries, > and into distribution site infrastructure. Yes. > The CVS servers really don't consume a tremendous amount of bandwidth, if > just the > comitters have access to them. It doesen't seem as though a few servers are > going to > represent much of a burden to anyone, and that you could easily get support > from > most ISP's for that. OK. Let's step back for a while here. While you may be right in saying that it's the end-product that matters, it's the product that's used etc, but I think that a project that does not give access to the development process itself (even if for just spectators) is missing something that cannot be easily compensated for. Let's consider a good example (because it is not an OS that can be rather self-contained), the Mozilla project. They do not seem to have the resources (and interest) to build and test on any BSD variant anymore, so if you just got the source to their releases and left to try to bring them to run on your box, you would face a big challange. But because the development process is open (and one of the best in terms of organization principles and development structures, even if the result does not always look pretty) you can test and chime in early if problems develop. Sure, it's their project, but while it's their right to not support a particular OS, it's not their best interest, if it's doable with just a bit of tweaking. While in this example support for BSDs may not be the key to success, in other cases the overall acceptance of the project may very well depend on such factors. Again, if we are talking "bigger" projects that go outside the circle of your immediate friends/collegaues and are meant to address more than your particular needs at the moment, acceptance starts to matter. This exact thing was the problem with the XFree project, too: You could get the new release when there was one out, but the development itself was not open. While this may not have prevented their overall acceptance (lacking a free alternative) it surely contributed to the fact the code has now become so complicated that only few people are actually capable of auditing it for security problems etc, and if you discount the people who actually wrote it (because they may not spot all errors, they are too intimately familiar with the code) hardly anyone remains. So most people simply prefer to think that "It oughtta work" and be done with it, but this is not what OpenSource is supposed to be about. The same thing with BIND, btw. I prefer to think of these not so much as "real" OpenSource projects, but rather remnants of that old time when hiding the source to one's program did not make a lot of sense, so if you wanted it, you got it. But this is not OpenSource, this is just "I don't care".:-) > WHat it seems to me really sucks the bandwidth is the distribution FTP > servers. Thus, > that is where most of the corporate support is going to flow. Of course, > you need > people to run these servers and so even more support is needed for salaries > and such. But without which your project will not gain wide-spread acceptance, for a number of factors. See below. > But, is it really essential to the world-class development infrastructure to > have an > FTP server that 4K simultaneous users can hit? Perhaps convincing more > people to > buy distributions instead of pulling the entire thing down over the Internet > would > go a long way towards funding the development and getting rid of our > dependence on > a single corporate sponsor to host the Project. This what OpenBSD seems to have adopted as a strategy (since they do not have much choice) but apart from the fact that it doesn't seem to work splendidly, it also is counter-productive for the project (as in: project means also a community not just code and infrastructure). I have long resented the voices on the misc@openbsd.org maillist that really sounded like selling CDs was more important than say welcoming new users or helping people. There were times when I almost could feel that "Have your official OpenBSD CD receipt ready before writing" attitude. This is simply disgusting to me. An OpenSource project, esp the bigger ones, should be about more than software. It is a way of working, thinking, socializing. Setting a good example, showing that you can do it differently than most believe, if you want. (For which reason I truly encourage OpenSource projects outside of software, too.) This attitude should not be ruined by mixing business matters into community. Also, CD distribution is bound to be limited. Why exclude a lot of people outright just because they happen to live in countries where your CDs are not sold? (For example, here in Hungary maybe you can buy the FreeBSD CDs half a year after release, which is already a lot of delay, but eventually maybe they get here, in one selected bookshop only, because the others do not order it, and other BSDs are not available at all. Of course, I could theoritcally order them from the USA or whatever, but that's theory, because I, like most Hungarians, am not good enough for my bank to issue a "real" credit card to, so only a few people have say a Visa Classic or a Mastercard that you can use to pay on the Internet with.) If you put the stuff on ftp, you at least give us guys a chance. Also, while the Internet is free for me here, I would not be necessarily able to afford buying the CD sets for every release. So... Let's just say that while this may sound like a good idea, it creates more problems IMHO than it solves. It introduces unnecessary tensions into a community, excludes close to the majority of the world's population, thereby wasting resources (people resources who could be useful for making the product better) and therefore ultimately runs counter to the idea behind OpenSource, at least IMHO. That's why these issues are so complicated:-) -- Regards: Szilveszter ADAM Szeged University Szeged Hungary To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Apr 19 23: 0:58 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DDC137B424 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:00:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3K60kk44963; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:00:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Szilveszter Adam" , Subject: RE: Funding large Open Source projects (was Windriver, Slackware) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:00:44 -0700 Message-ID: <000101c0c95f$3d083cc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010419121942.A15266@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Szilveszter Adam > >OK. Let's step back for a while here. While you may be right in saying that >it's the end-product that matters, it's the product that's used etc, but I >think that a project that does not give access to the development process >itself (even if for just spectators) is missing something that cannot be >easily compensated for. Let's consider a good example (because it is not an >OS that can be rather self-contained), the Mozilla project. They do not >seem to have the resources (and interest) to build and test on any BSD >variant anymore, so if you just got the source to their releases and left >to try to bring them to run on your box, you would face a big challange. >But because the development process is open (and one of the best in terms >of organization principles and development structures, even if the result >does not always look pretty) you can test and chime in early if problems >develop. Sure, it's their project, but while it's their right to not >support a particular OS, it's not their best interest, if it's doable with >just a bit of tweaking. While in this example support for BSDs may not be >the key to success, in other cases the overall acceptance of the project >may very well depend on such factors. Again, if we are talking "bigger" >projects that go outside the circle of your immediate friends/collegaues >and are meant to address more than your particular needs at the moment, >acceptance starts to matter. > >This exact thing was the problem with the XFree project, too: You could get >the new release when there was one out, but the development itself was not >open. While this may not have prevented their overall acceptance (lacking >a free alternative) it surely contributed to the fact the code has now >become so complicated that only few people are actually capable of auditing >it for security problems etc, and if you discount the people who actually >wrote it (because they may not spot all errors, they are too intimately >familiar with the code) hardly anyone remains. So most people simply prefer >to think that "It oughtta work" and be done with it, but this is not what >OpenSource is supposed to be about. The same thing with BIND, btw. I prefer >to think of these not so much as "real" OpenSource projects, but rather >remnants of that old time when hiding the source to one's program did not >make a lot of sense, so if you wanted it, you got it. But this is not >OpenSource, this is just "I don't care".:-) > This is an interesting point. I don't know myself at what point Open Source has suddenly come to mean "source cooperatively developed on the Internet" but this is what it appears that your saying. I'm not sure that a one-size-fits-all model of every source being cooperatively developed on the Internet with open cvsup servers and all that is appropriate for all Open Source projects. It seems a lot of work to maintain that administrative infrastructure for a project that is narrow - bind for instance is an example. Are there really a crowd of spectators all wanting to view the development process for that program? >> WHat it seems to me really sucks the bandwidth is the distribution FTP >> servers. Thus, >> that is where most of the corporate support is going to flow. Of course, >> you need >> people to run these servers and so even more support is needed >for salaries >> and such. > >But without which your project will not gain wide-spread acceptance, for a >number of factors. See below. > Should gaining widespread acceptance be the goal of every open source project? That's a commercial, not a personal, goal. I think the goal of any Open Source project should be to be the best-of-breed, that's my major difference of opinion with the Linux camp. While certainly some Linux distributions do have being the best distribution as their goal, it appears to me that the overall goal of the entire Linux movement is to get on as many systems as possible. Being the best UNIX-like OS is secondary. I've found that in life, it is usually the top-quality products that don't have the greatest numbers of sales. Usually, the bestsellers are not as good quality as many other products. >> But, is it really essential to the world-class development >infrastructure to >> have an >> FTP server that 4K simultaneous users can hit? Perhaps convincing more >> people to >> buy distributions instead of pulling the entire thing down over >the Internet >> would >> go a long way towards funding the development and getting rid of our >> dependence on >> a single corporate sponsor to host the Project. > >This what OpenBSD seems to have adopted as a strategy (since they do not >have much choice) but apart from the fact that it doesn't seem to work >splendidly, it also is counter-productive for the project (as in: project >means also a community not just code and infrastructure). I have long >resented the voices on the misc@openbsd.org maillist that really sounded >like selling CDs was more important than say welcoming new users or helping >people. There were times when I almost could feel that "Have your official >OpenBSD CD receipt ready before writing" attitude. This is simply >disgusting to me. > There's more subtle ways of "convincing" people to do something than by ham-handedly shutting something off. Here in Portland OR, the misguided tree-huggers that apparently control city government all hate automobiles. For the last 30 years they have been hamstringing every roads project that has come up. In fact, in the worst abuse of this in the city's history, about 15 years ago they torpedoed an _entire_new_freeway_ project and sidetracked the money into light rail. That light rail project has now been in operation for 5-10 years now and only carries about 5% of all commuters, and doesen't even go where the freeway was supposed to have gone. Their belief is that if they make the roads as uncomfortable as possible to drive on (ie: as congested as possible) that people will give up their cars and ride busses. I assume that this idea actually does work, in a limited fashion, or they wouldn't keep doing it. To relate this to the FreeBSD project, what if they simply put a moratorium on additional capacity for the feeds into the archive site? This makes the master site more uncomftorable to use, thus pushes people onto the mirror sites. Since the mirrors aren't funded by the Project directly, while in the last analysis nobody has really lost capacity to _access_ FreeBSD, (since they are just using the same bandwidth on the mirrors now as before) it has reduced the Project's dependency on a single corporate sponsor because the master archive site won't be costing new amounts of money for new upgrades. >An OpenSource project, esp the bigger ones, should be >about more than software. It is a way of working, thinking, socializing. >Setting a good example, showing that you can do it differently than most >believe, if you want. (For which reason I truly encourage OpenSource >projects outside of software, too.) This attitude should not be ruined by >mixing business matters into community. > But you started the mixing of business matters into the discussion. Look, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the Project goes whole-hog for lots of corporate sponsorship, or it spurns that in favor of pure volunteer effort. The former gives the Project money for bandwidth and cvsup servers, but you have to accept some "mixing" The latter keeps the movement "pure" of business matters, but you don't get all the fringes either. >Also, CD distribution is bound to >be limited. Why exclude a lot of people outright just because they happen >to live in countries where your CDs are not sold? (For example, here in >Hungary maybe you can buy the FreeBSD CDs half a year after release, which >is already a lot of delay, but eventually maybe they get here, in one >selected bookshop only, because the others do not order it, and other BSDs >are not available at all. Of course, I could theoritcally order them from >the USA or whatever, but that's theory, because I, like most Hungarians, am >not good enough for my bank to issue a "real" credit card to, so only a few >people have say a Visa Classic or a Mastercard that you can use to pay on >the Internet with.) If you put the stuff on ftp, you at least give us guys >a chance. Also, while the Internet is free for me here, I would not be >necessarily able to afford buying the CD sets for every release. So... > You should be using a mirror site near you. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 10: 3: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from servww6.ww.uni-erlangen.de (servww6.ww.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.238.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D94837B423 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:02:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ardelean@ww.uni-erlangen.de) Received: from localhost (ardelean@localhost) by servww6.ww.uni-erlangen.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA26625 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 19:02:54 +0200 Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 19:02:54 +0200 (CEST) From: Ardelean Gheorghe To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: top uptime! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi, I thing it's enough to look at http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html to understand how stable FreeBSD is! Regards, G. Ardelean To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 10:26:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B521037B424 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:26:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.47.12]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA301; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:31:44 -0700 Message-ID: <3AE07137.5B2EB5CB@acuson.com> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:26:15 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ardelean Gheorghe Cc: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ardelean Gheorghe wrote: > > Hi, > > I thing it's enough to look at > > http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html > > to understand how stable FreeBSD is! It's very interesting to note which OS is *not* listed. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 10:31:39 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from dehumanizer.meganet.pt (hyperion.meganet.pt [194.38.131.251]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5A4837B43C for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:31:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from deh@meganet.pt) Received: from dehumanizer.meganet.pt (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by dehumanizer.meganet.pt (Postfix) with SMTP id 4D4E91F1F2 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 18:25:11 +0100 (WEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Pedro Timoteo Organization: OniSolutions To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 18:25:11 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] References: <3AE07137.5B2EB5CB@acuson.com> In-Reply-To: <3AE07137.5B2EB5CB@acuson.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <0104201825111T.20864@dehumanizer.meganet.pt> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > It's very interesting to note which OS is *not* listed. I don't want to be TOO annoying, but could it be because the linux kernel 2.4 is about 4 months old, and since then most people have upgraded to it, ruining their uptimes? I'm not saying that Linux is more stable (I know it isn't, I use both), but in this case I don't think the stability of Linux is fairly shown here. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 10:36: 5 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from dehumanizer.meganet.pt (hyperion.meganet.pt [194.38.131.251]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B939D37B422 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:36:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from deh@meganet.pt) Received: from dehumanizer.meganet.pt (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by dehumanizer.meganet.pt (Postfix) with SMTP id F2E0A1F1F2 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 18:29:43 +0100 (WEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Pedro Timoteo Organization: OniSolutions To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 18:29:43 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] References: <3AE07137.5B2EB5CB@acuson.com> <0104201825111T.20864@dehumanizer.meganet.pt> In-Reply-To: <0104201825111T.20864@dehumanizer.meganet.pt> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <0104201829431V.20864@dehumanizer.meganet.pt> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Friday 20 April 2001 18:25, you wrote: > I'm not saying that Linux is more stable (I know it isn't, I use both), but > in this case I don't think the stability of Linux is fairly shown here. Also (it's funny to reply to my own message), for a FreeBSD to have an uptime greater than 1000 days, it's got to be an early 2.x. So, this list shows nothing about the stability of 3.x or 4.x. I'm not *doubting* it's great, but we'll only have "proof" when in 3 or 4 years there are some 4.xs still running. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 10:40:44 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from puke.reno.oemsupport.com (64-42-17-172.atgi.net [64.42.17.172]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7863437B424 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:40:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pcalkins@oemsupport.com) Received: by puke.reno.oemsupport.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:40:41 -0700 Message-ID: <9B9CB6555E6BA049BC2B857E7711C24F0239A3@puke.reno.oemsupport.com> From: Patrick Calkins To: 'David Johnson' , "Freebsd-Advocacy (E-mail)" Subject: RE: top uptime! Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:40:40 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hehe, well actually I did find it (look at #36) but it doesn't make sense: How could it be running Apache (Unix)??? Wouldn't it be saying Apache (Windows) ??? -----Original Message----- From: David Johnson [mailto:djohnson@acuson.com] Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 10:26 AM To: Ardelean Gheorghe Cc: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! Ardelean Gheorghe wrote: > > Hi, > > I thing it's enough to look at > > http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html > > to understand how stable FreeBSD is! It's very interesting to note which OS is *not* listed. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 10:42:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from puke.reno.oemsupport.com (64-42-17-172.atgi.net [64.42.17.172]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF9837B446 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:42:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pcalkins@oemsupport.com) Received: by puke.reno.oemsupport.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:42:34 -0700 Message-ID: <9B9CB6555E6BA049BC2B857E7711C24F0239A4@puke.reno.oemsupport.com> From: Patrick Calkins To: 'Pedro Timoteo' , "Freebsd-Advocacy (E-mail)" Subject: RE: top uptime! Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:42:34 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Well, true enough about the stability about the early 2.x, but is it possible to be running them in some sort of cluster so they could take them down to do kernel upgrades one-by-one without affecting the site up-time? Or is this the up-time of a single box?? -----Original Message----- From: Pedro Timoteo [mailto:deh@meganet.pt] Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 10:30 AM To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! On Friday 20 April 2001 18:25, you wrote: > I'm not saying that Linux is more stable (I know it isn't, I use both), but > in this case I don't think the stability of Linux is fairly shown here. Also (it's funny to reply to my own message), for a FreeBSD to have an uptime greater than 1000 days, it's got to be an early 2.x. So, this list shows nothing about the stability of 3.x or 4.x. I'm not *doubting* it's great, but we'll only have "proof" when in 3 or 4 years there are some 4.xs still running. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 10:50:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7FF837B440 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:50:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.47.12]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA1263; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:55:58 -0700 Message-ID: <3AE076E5.A0BAA309@acuson.com> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:50:29 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Timoteo Cc: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! References: <3AE07137.5B2EB5CB@acuson.com> <0104201825111T.20864@dehumanizer.meganet.pt> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Pedro Timoteo wrote: > I don't want to be TOO annoying, but could it be because the linux kernel 2.4 > is about 4 months old, and since then most people have upgraded to it, > ruining their uptimes? I seriously doubt that many people have upgrades to linux 2.4, particularly those with servers. If 2.2 (or 2.0) is meeting your needs, why upgrade to an untested kernel? Really now, how many operational webservers need the new features offered in 2.4? David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 10:58:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from inconnu.isu.edu (inconnu.isu.edu [134.50.8.55]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 200EA37B43F for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:58:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from galt@inconnu.isu.edu) Received: from localhost (galt@localhost) by inconnu.isu.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA02097; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:58:22 -0600 Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:58:14 -0600 (MDT) From: John Galt To: David Johnson Cc: Pedro Timoteo , Subject: Re: top uptime! In-Reply-To: <3AE076E5.A0BAA309@acuson.com> Message-ID: Copies-to: galt@inconnu.isu.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 More importantly, how many sysadmins can trust some of the new bugs introduced by politics in the Linux Kernel? ReiserFS for a big example: there was no real technical reason to include Reiser in a stable kernel (it's still unproven and broke in 2.4.2), the only reason was that Reiser advocates screamed loud enough so that Linus relented. Another big one is the ATA works in progress: the only reason it was included in 2.3.99 was that Hedrick threw a hissy fit and released a 'sploit for the older code. I'm thinking that Linux is becoming 10 layer OSI compliant really quickly... On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, David Johnson wrote: >Pedro Timoteo wrote: > >> I don't want to be TOO annoying, but could it be because the linux kernel 2.4 >> is about 4 months old, and since then most people have upgraded to it, >> ruining their uptimes? > >I seriously doubt that many people have upgrades to linux 2.4, >particularly those with servers. If 2.2 (or 2.0) is meeting your needs, >why upgrade to an untested kernel? Really now, how many operational >webservers need the new features offered in 2.4? > >David > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > - -- Who is John Galt? Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product. -- Ferenc Mantfeld -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBOuB4vB9mehuYcOjMEQLtvwCbB/DU4AaQTpBrGFUXX9uS80TE14IAoNKW FxOeD6mhxgqomS+6c7+v7HLa =9Z/J -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 11: 2:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DA3337B443 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:02:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.47.12]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA1A21; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:08:02 -0700 Message-ID: <3AE079B9.1BD28BA9@acuson.com> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:02:33 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Patrick Calkins Cc: "Freebsd-Advocacy (E-mail)" Subject: Re: top uptime! References: <9B9CB6555E6BA049BC2B857E7711C24F0239A3@puke.reno.oemsupport.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Patrick Calkins wrote: > > Hehe, well actually I did find it (look at #36) but it doesn't make sense: > How could it be running Apache (Unix)??? Wouldn't it be saying Apache > (Windows) ??? Actually I was referring to Linux. I would discount #36 as garbled, and remove WinNT from the list, leaving the two OS's that brag the most about their stability out of the running. Also notable in its absence is Solaris, the system that runs the webserver for those guys that bought BSDi (http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.windriver.com) David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 11:10:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from pilchuck.reedmedia.net (pilchuck.reedmedia.net [63.145.197.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E8437B424 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:10:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from reed@reedmedia.net) Received: from reed by pilchuck.reedmedia.net with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 14qfMZ-0007DB-00; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:10:35 -0700 Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:10:35 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jeremy C. Reed" To: Pedro Timoteo Cc: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! In-Reply-To: <0104201829431V.20864@dehumanizer.meganet.pt> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Pedro Timoteo wrote: > > It's very interesting to note which OS is *not* listed. > > I don't want to be TOO annoying, but could it be because the linux kernel 2.4 > is about 4 months old, and since then most people have upgraded to it, > ruining their uptimes? That doesn't make sense. If that was the case, then what about FreeBSD people upgrading their FreeBSD kernels to the latest (and ruining their uptimes)? > I'm not saying that Linux is more stable (I know it isn't, I use both), but > in this case I don't think the stability of Linux is fairly shown here. I ran Linux 2.0.36 for 497 days. It had some known 497-day bug (jiffy problem?) that crashed it with a kernel panic. Jeremy C. Reed http://www.reedmedia.net/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 11:16: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from inu.net (mail.inu.net [63.151.4.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A4EA37B423 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:15:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bob@buckhorn.net) Received: from buckhorn.net [63.151.3.239] by inu.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-5.05) id ACDCC960178; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:15:56 -0500 Message-ID: <3AE07CBF.13F6A56D@buckhorn.net> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:15:27 -0500 From: Bob Martin Reply-To: bob@inu.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG #36 Is really interesting if you follow the "What's that site running link" It explains everything. I don't know that I really trust these uptimes all that much, except in a general way. Also note the disclaimer "For performance reasons, we limit this monitoring process to the most frequently requested sites." could have more than a little to do with which OS's makes the list. To me the really cool stuff is in the far right column. -- Bob Martin, CTO InterNet Unlimited http://www.inu.net mailto:bob@inu.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 12: 0: 6 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from q.closedsrc.org (ip233.gte15.rb1.bel.nwlink.com [209.20.244.233]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D73E37B422 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 12:00:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lplist@closedsrc.org) Received: by q.closedsrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 5B53055407; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by q.closedsrc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BCDA51610; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:54:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Linh Pham To: Cc: Subject: Re: top uptime! In-Reply-To: <3AE07CBF.13F6A56D@buckhorn.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 2001-04-20, Bob Martin scribbled: # I don't know that I really trust these uptimes all that much, except in # a general way. Also note the disclaimer "For performance reasons, we # limit this monitoring process to the most frequently requested sites." # could have more than a little to do with which OS's makes the list. I wouldn't trust them a bit... Slashdot and several other discussion boards have had nice discussions about some of the uptimes. I think they do it on pings and if anything about the server changes for some reason. Definitely doesn't work very well (invalid uptimes like: longer uptimes, etc.) if the domain is hosted behind a load balancer, proxying firewall, et al. A better way to measure uptime is to run an script on a machine that gets the output of `uptime' and sends that with an ID of the server to a central DB. -- Linh Pham [lplist@closedsrc.org] // 404b - Brain not found To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 13:27:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from inu.net (mail.inu.net [63.151.4.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2277937B422 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:27:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bob@buckhorn.net) Received: from buckhorn.net [63.151.3.239] by inu.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-5.05) id ABBF16C301C8; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:27:43 -0500 Message-ID: <3AE09BA1.571C4963@buckhorn.net> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:27:13 -0500 From: Bob Martin Reply-To: bob@inu.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FreeBSD-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: [Fwd: RE: top uptime!] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -------- Original Message -------- From: "Dan White" Subject: RE: top uptime! To: Can you also mention to -advocacy that those measurements are very inacurate? since it only knows if the site is up when it probes it , it could be down any time between tests. I cant post because this IP has no reverse lookup :(. Daniel White Programmer/Analyst Twisted Air Technologies dwhite@twistedair.com http://www.twistedair.com Tel: (905) 567-6266 Fax: (905) 567-0094 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > [mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Bob Martin > Sent: 2001-04-20 2:15 PM > To: advocacy@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: top uptime! > > > #36 Is really interesting if you follow the "What's that site running > link" It explains everything. > > I don't know that I really trust these uptimes all that much, > except in > a general way. Also note the disclaimer "For performance reasons, we > limit this monitoring process to the most frequently requested sites." > could have more than a little to do with which OS's makes the list. > > To me the really cool stuff is in the far right column. > > -- > Bob Martin, CTO > InterNet Unlimited > http://www.inu.net > mailto:bob@inu.net > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 14: 0:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-63-207-60-27.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [63.207.60.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F94937B424 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:00:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 36D9166B1C; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:00:38 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Pedro Timoteo Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: top uptime! Message-ID: <20010420140038.A844@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <3AE07137.5B2EB5CB@acuson.com> <0104201825111T.20864@dehumanizer.meganet.pt> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <0104201825111T.20864@dehumanizer.meganet.pt>; from deh@meganet.pt on Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 06:25:11PM +0100 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 06:25:11PM +0100, Pedro Timoteo wrote: > > It's very interesting to note which OS is *not* listed. >=20 > I don't want to be TOO annoying, but could it be because the linux kernel= 2.4=20 > is about 4 months old, and since then most people have upgraded to it,=20 > ruining their uptimes? >=20 > I'm not saying that Linux is more stable (I know it isn't, I use both), b= ut=20 > in this case I don't think the stability of Linux is fairly shown here. By that same logic people using FreeBSD should have upgraded to 4.2, ruining their uptimes. Some evidently did, but if Linux 2.0.whatever was as stable as FreeBSD 2.2.whatever (i.e. dating from the same time period), one should expect to see them both represented at the top of the list, all other things being equal. As noted by other respondants, this only shows information about very old versions of Linux and FreeBSD by its very nature. Kris --sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE64KN2Wry0BWjoQKURArdOAKCA+55xrrYDPdTy0jMJx35NTovxDQCfcg/t YIucFyDx6ndZ2GoqwEJirB8= =sdQB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 17: 0:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569DD37B423 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:00:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: by wantadilla.lemis.com (Postfix, from userid 1004) id F384A6ACBA; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 09:30:09 +0930 (CST) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 09:30:09 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: "Jeremy C. Reed" Cc: Pedro Timoteo , advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! Message-ID: <20010421093009.M72002@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <0104201829431V.20864@dehumanizer.meganet.pt> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from reed@reedmedia.net on Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 11:10:35AM -0700 Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Friday, 20 April 2001 at 11:10:35 -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Pedro Timoteo wrote: > >>> It's very interesting to note which OS is *not* listed. >> >> I don't want to be TOO annoying, but could it be because the linux kernel 2.4 >> is about 4 months old, and since then most people have upgraded to it, >> ruining their uptimes? > > That doesn't make sense. If that was the case, then what about FreeBSD > people upgrading their FreeBSD kernels to the latest (and ruining their > uptimes)? Of course. >> I'm not saying that Linux is more stable (I know it isn't, I use both), but >> in this case I don't think the stability of Linux is fairly shown here. > > I ran Linux 2.0.36 for 497 days. It had some known 497-day bug (jiffy > problem?) that crashed it with a kernel panic. Is it possible that this bug was fixed less than 595 days ago? That seems to be the only sensible explanation I can find for Linux' complete absence from this list. Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 17:38:26 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from pilchuck.reedmedia.net (pilchuck.reedmedia.net [63.145.197.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D76837B424 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:38:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from reed@reedmedia.net) Received: from reed by pilchuck.reedmedia.net with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 14qlPp-0007UA-00; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:38:21 -0700 Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:38:21 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jeremy C. Reed" To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top uptime! In-Reply-To: <20010421093009.M72002@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Greg Lehey wrote: > > I ran Linux 2.0.36 for 497 days. It had some known 497-day bug (jiffy > > problem?) that crashed it with a kernel panic. > > Is it possible that this bug was fixed less than 595 days ago? That > seems to be the only sensible explanation I can find for Linux' > complete absence from this list. I am having a heck of time finding a complete Changes Log for Linux. But I am finding some postings about this Linux jiffie wraparound problem on the linux-kernel list. From Linus: http://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9810.2/0404.html It appears that some jiffie wraparound patches were available in Oct, 1999 and some patches were being discussed in May, 2000. I really have no clue if it is fixed even today. Here is another interesting posting: http://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9910.0/0114.html Jeremy C. Reed http://www.reedmedia.net/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 19:23:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.hiwaay.net (fly.HiWAAY.net [208.147.154.56]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EB7F37B424 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 19:23:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from steve@havk.org) Received: from bsd.havk.org (user-24-214-92-252.knology.net [24.214.92.252]) by mail.hiwaay.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3L2Ne527742; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 21:23:43 -0500 (CDT) Received: by bsd.havk.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 299E21A7D8; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 21:23:38 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 21:23:38 -0500 From: Steve Price To: "Jeremy C. Reed" Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: top uptime! Message-ID: <20010420212338.Z41536@bsd.havk.org> References: <20010421093009.M72002@wantadilla.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from reed@reedmedia.net on Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 05:38:21PM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.3-RC i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 05:38:21PM -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > > > I ran Linux 2.0.36 for 497 days. It had some known 497-day bug (jiffy > > > problem?) that crashed it with a kernel panic. > > > > Is it possible that this bug was fixed less than 595 days ago? That > > seems to be the only sensible explanation I can find for Linux' > > complete absence from this list. This topic came up just yesterday on a Linux user's group list that I'm listen in on here in town. A guy who I believe to be very knowlegable about Linux (especially RedHat, he even willingly bought a red fedorra) said that the bug that caused Linux to crash after 497.1 days was fixed quite some time ago. However the uptime counter (cat /proc/uptime) is counted in seconds in a 32bit variable. So it isn't possible for a Linux box to show more than 497 days of uptime because the uptime rolls over then. FWIW. -steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 20:15: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.85]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EF7F537B43F for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 20:14:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tms2@mail.ptd.net) Received: (qmail 20533 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2001 02:12:06 -0000 Received: from mail1.ha-net.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) ([207.44.96.65]) (envelope-sender ) by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 21 Apr 2001 02:12:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 4536 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2001 03:14:59 -0000 Received: from du36.cli.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) ([204.186.33.36]) (envelope-sender ) by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 21 Apr 2001 03:14:59 -0000 Message-ID: <3AE0FADE.5801FF96@mail.ptd.net> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 23:13:34 -0400 From: "Thomas M. Sommers" Organization: None X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.2-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: top uptime! References: <20010421093009.M72002@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20010420212338.Z41536@bsd.havk.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Steve Price wrote: > >. However the uptime counter > (cat /proc/uptime) is counted in seconds in a 32bit variable. So it > isn't possible for a Linux box to show more than 497 days of uptime > because the uptime rolls over then. FWIW. But 497 days is only about 4.3e7 seconds, whereas 32 bits can count about 2e9 seconds (signed). To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 21:51:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D88137B422 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 21:51:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=daf62544ee3d369696665c243b97b5fd) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14qpMx-0000Fi-00; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 22:51:39 -0600 Message-ID: <3AE111DB.BE02664D@softweyr.com> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 22:51:39 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Thomas M. Sommers" Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: top uptime! References: <20010421093009.M72002@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20010420212338.Z41536@bsd.havk.org> <3AE0FADE.5801FF96@mail.ptd.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Thomas M. Sommers" wrote: > > Steve Price wrote: > > > >. However the uptime counter > > (cat /proc/uptime) is counted in seconds in a 32bit variable. So it > > isn't possible for a Linux box to show more than 497 days of uptime > > because the uptime rolls over then. FWIW. > > But 497 days is only about 4.3e7 seconds, whereas 32 bits can count > about 2e9 seconds (signed). Microseconds? -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Apr 20 23:25:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EB5D37B422 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 23:25:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=12a6f6fb8203bf14b8ebbeed15e55ad3) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14qqpc-0000I4-00; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 00:25:20 -0600 Message-ID: <3AE127D0.E935F8B9@softweyr.com> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 00:25:20 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: Szilveszter Adam , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Funding large Open Source projects (was Windriver, Slackware) References: <000101c0c95f$3d083cc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > Apparently Szilveszter Adam blathered: > > > >But without which your project will not gain wide-spread > >acceptance, for a number of factors. See below. > > Should gaining widespread acceptance be the goal of every open > source project? That's a commercial, not a personal, goal. > > I think the goal of any Open Source project should be to be the > best-of-breed, that's my major difference of opinion with the Linux > camp. While certainly some Linux distributions do have being the > best distribution as their goal, it appears to me that the overall > goal of the entire Linux movement is to get on as many systems as > possible. Being the best UNIX-like OS is secondary. I think OpenBSD embodies this ethos better than any other "open source" project I've encountered. They have a firm idea of what they want out of the system, they pursue it with zeal, and they pretty much do not care what others think. If you like the system, fine. If you use the system, fine. If you want to contribute, fine. If you don't, then just go away and stop wasting their time. While not my favorite system to use, or to hack on, it is an ethos I resonate with. Anyone who's read the FreeBSD lists for long will probably recognize my rantings about this in the FreeBSD community. FreeBSD is built by its contributors to be what THEY want it to be. It is not driven by marketing "genuises", or by "customer" demands, it is driven by people who use it in their daily lives. FreeBSD does pay attention to "market share" and "mind share" issues, but not enough to worry me (yet). > I've found that in life, it is usually the top-quality products that > don't have the greatest numbers of sales. Usually, the bestsellers > are not as good quality as many other products. A few years ago I left Intel, who had acquired my employer, to go work on high-speed IP switches for Xylan. On the way out, one of the hardware engineers said "how can you leave Intel for a tiny company like that?" My reply was "Gee, Woody, you're right, I bet those Ferrari engineers kick themselves every day on the way to work for not working for GM." Life is a tradeoff, nothing is perfect. FreeBSD developers decide daily if they're making a Ferrari, or perhaps a Terex truck. I for one am glad they never settle for making a Chevette. The OpenBSD gang are building armored trucks with encrypted gearshifts, because that's what they want. They're doing a pretty good job of it. Ditto for NetBSD, who're building the BSD to run in everything. > Here in Portland OR, the misguided tree-huggers that apparently > control city government all hate automobiles... > > Their belief is that if they make the roads as uncomfortable as > possible to drive on (ie: as congested as possible) that people will > give up their cars and ride busses. I assume that this idea > actually does work, in a limited fashion, or they wouldn't keep > doing it. What, you assume they're NOT crazy? That's a bad assumption. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Apr 21 0:19: 7 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B9EB37B43F for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 00:19:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=0601de7f49edbbf84a2cf9b0aa3fc833) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14qrXp-0000JA-00; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 01:11:01 -0600 Message-ID: <3AE13285.F790DC95@softweyr.com> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 01:11:01 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rahul Siddharthan Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt , David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: MacOS Themes, was RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD References: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> <006e01c0c7dd$fd2c1b80$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> <20010418102655.E27000@lpt.ens.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > Ted Mittelstaedt said on Apr 18, 2001 at 01:03:01: > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Rahul Siddharthan [mailto:rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in] > > > > > >Another bit of uneasy news was Apple's threatening a Mac theme editor, > > >http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=2773 > > >Note that this is quite different from threatening themes.org: this > > >editor was for creating themes for *MacOS itself*. > > > > > > > This is fallout from the Napster decision, I wouldn't worry about it, > > and indeed the entire Napster thing is just a rehash of the lawsuits > > over the copy protection software that took place back in the 80's. > > Whatever. I'm not worried about theme editors for MacOS, but about > corporate attitudes in general. > > Wind River's action about slackware is not very encouraging. In any > case, they don't have any kind of known commitment to free software, Maybe not known to YOU, but they certainly have a commitment to certain types of "free software", which is a useless term. In particular, they have been a commercial sponsor of GCC/GDB/binutils development for more than a decade now. > and (from what I've read about them) no particular motivation for > donating anything back to FreeBSD. As such, I'm happy if they hire They have exactly the same reason Whistle, Yahoo, and others have: enlightened self-interest. To them now, a BSD/OS or FreeBSD "design win" *IS* a WindRiver design win, and folding code into FreeBSD means they have somebody other than paid employees to help them test, debug, and maintain it. > individual FreeBSD people to help them with their embedded system > work, but I am not happy if the FreeBSD OS itself becomes closely > associated with such a company -- any more than I would be if > Transmeta tried to associate itself with linux (which they don't). They don't? What rock are you living under? You apparently haven't been shopping for Transmeta devices lately. > People in the linux world complain about the dominance of Red Hat and > the popular "RH=linux" misconception, but at least RH's commitment to > free software has never been in doubt. It hasn't? What rock are you living under? I guess you missed the entire "Linux Standards Base" debate, huh? -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Apr 21 1:25:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F3DA37B424 for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 01:25:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=e8366bbac5498f297bcd31ac7bc8eb5f) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14qshK-0000L4-00; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 02:24:54 -0600 Message-ID: <3AE143D6.2C4742B4@softweyr.com> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 02:24:54 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rahul Siddharthan Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt , David Johnson , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD References: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> <007201c0c7e1$65489b00$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> <20010418103127.F27000@lpt.ens.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > Ted Mittelstaedt said on Apr 18, 2001 at 01:27:24: > > >Consider the following scenario: Apple has a patent on some very > > >low-level algorithm, but doesn't tell people. (They do claim a patent > > >on theming, so why not on some OS-related thing?) Their people (no > > >doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD. > > > > The second that an Apple employee formally contributed patented source > > to FreeBSD, it would tremendously weaken the Apple patent to the point > > where it would impede it's enforceability. > > As I understand it (IANAL), non-enforcement of patents doesn't weaken > them (unlike trademarks, where you do have to enforce them actively). You're right, but non-enforcement and contribution are not the same. If Apple contributed patented source to FreeBSD and released it under BSD-ish license terms, that means that anyone can use it on the same terms as you and I. > Unisys waited for years, until GIFs became entrenched standards on the > web, before trying to enforce their LZW patent. Many big corporations > did pay up. Probably not comparable, Unisys didn't publish or contribute the LZW code. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Apr 21 2:54:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from daedalus.cs.brandeis.edu (daedalus.cs.brandeis.edu [129.64.3.179]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B540A37B422 for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 02:54:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from meshko@daedalus.cs.brandeis.edu) Received: from localhost (meshko@localhost) by daedalus.cs.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA01586 for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 05:54:44 -0400 Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 05:54:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Mikhail Kruk To: Subject: PC Magazine, Mac OS X (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/stories/reviews/0,6755,2709033,00.html As usual: Mac OS X is built on a customized variant of the mach3 Unix kernel and bsd Linux When, oh when will they learn? At least BSD is capital in the printed edition, if it makes you feel better. If it doesn't, check out the next paragraph (same article): ------ The clunkiness of the Unix operating system is apparent at log-on. Case-sensitive user names and passwords are required, which is a bit of a tedious distraction. ------ What are they smoking? ...and no, I do not normally read PC Magazine. I grabbed it in CVS while waiting in line... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Apr 21 5: 6:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.hiwaay.net (fly.HiWAAY.net [208.147.154.56]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F0A737B422 for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 05:06:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from steve@havk.org) Received: from bsd.havk.org (user-24-214-92-252.knology.net [24.214.92.252]) by mail.hiwaay.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3LC5x504187; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 07:05:59 -0500 (CDT) Received: by bsd.havk.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 404BC1A7D8; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 07:05:57 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 07:05:57 -0500 From: Steve Price To: Wes Peters Cc: "Thomas M. Sommers" , advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: top uptime! Message-ID: <20010421070557.D41536@bsd.havk.org> References: <20010421093009.M72002@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20010420212338.Z41536@bsd.havk.org> <3AE0FADE.5801FF96@mail.ptd.net> <3AE111DB.BE02664D@softweyr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3AE111DB.BE02664D@softweyr.com>; from wes@softweyr.com on Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 10:51:39PM -0600 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.3-RC i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 10:51:39PM -0600, Wes Peters wrote: > "Thomas M. Sommers" wrote: > > > > Steve Price wrote: > > > > > >. However the uptime counter > > > (cat /proc/uptime) is counted in seconds in a 32bit variable. So it > > > isn't possible for a Linux box to show more than 497 days of uptime > > > because the uptime rolls over then. FWIW. > > > > But 497 days is only about 4.3e7 seconds, whereas 32 bits can count > > about 2e9 seconds (signed). > > Microseconds? microseconds, milliseoconds, jiffies, spiffies, ... who the heck cares. The point was that Linux has a 32-bit variable that it uses to keep track of uptime with. That counter rolls over at 497 days or so I'm led to believe. So someone (or some box) running Linux can't legitimately claim to have an uptime longer than that. I've been told that is why you don't see Linux at the Netcraft link provided earlier. I didn't actually whip out pen and paper or a calculator to try and do the math. I could care less about what Linux can and cannot do. I was just passing on information that had been given to me that seemed plausible and relevant to this discussion. Pick nits if you must. I'm going back to finish up the Alpha package bits for the 4.3 release. -steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Apr 21 5:20: 7 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 086CE37B42C for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 05:20:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f3LCK2q21628; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 05:20:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE31137B422 for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 05:11:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nobody@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from nobody@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f3LCBaE21100; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 05:11:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nobody) Message-Id: <200104211211.f3LCBaE21100@freefall.freebsd.org> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 05:11:36 -0700 (PDT) From: riccardo@torrini.org To: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org X-Send-Pr-Version: www-1.0 Subject: advocacy/26744: Unable to send mail to FreeBSD.org from home and from work Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >Number: 26744 >Category: advocacy >Synopsis: Unable to send mail to FreeBSD.org from home and from work >Confidential: no >Severity: critical >Priority: high >Responsible: freebsd-advocacy >State: open >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: change-request >Submitter-Id: current-users >Arrival-Date: Sat Apr 21 05:20:01 PDT 2001 >Closed-Date: >Last-Modified: >Originator: Riccardo Torrini >Release: 5.0-CURRENT (Apr 18, 2001) >Organization: >Environment: FreeBSD trudy.home.torrini.org 5.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #10: Wed Apr 18 10:28:23 CEST 2001 root@trudy.home.torrini.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/TRUDY i386 >Description: I have static IP address at home (ADSL) and static IP at work (HDSL) but neither from home nor from work I am able to sent mail to FreeBSD.org to submit PR or to write to mailing list. I am currently subscribed only to freebsd-current, but I can only read messages, write fail with: <<< 450 Client host rejected: cannot find your hostname ... Deferred: 450 Client host rejected: cannot find your hostname >How-To-Repeat: Send mail to FreeBSD.org from a static IP without reverse entry in DNS. >Fix: Remove sendmail paranoid. A static IP w/out reverse must be enabled. Is more secure than a dynamic IP (dial-up) with reverse (IMHO). If my ISP is unable to fix is not a my fault. Also my ISP doesn't have reverse on his IP so I cannot send mail using his smtp gateway :-( >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: >Unformatted: To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Apr 21 18:15:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AFCE37B422 for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 18:15:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: by wantadilla.lemis.com (Postfix, from userid 1004) id 479E46ACBA; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 10:45:46 +0930 (CST) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 10:45:46 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: "Thomas M. Sommers" Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: top uptime! Message-ID: <20010422104546.A51968@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <20010421093009.M72002@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20010420212338.Z41536@bsd.havk.org> <3AE0FADE.5801FF96@mail.ptd.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3AE0FADE.5801FF96@mail.ptd.net>; from tms2@mail.ptd.net on Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 11:13:34PM -0400 Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Friday, 20 April 2001 at 23:13:34 -0400, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: > Steve Price wrote: >> >> . However the uptime counter >> (cat /proc/uptime) is counted in seconds in a 32bit variable. So it >> isn't possible for a Linux box to show more than 497 days of uptime >> because the uptime rolls over then. FWIW. > > But 497 days is only about 4.3e7 seconds, whereas 32 bits can count > about 2e9 seconds (signed). That makes 24855 days. Unsigned, it would be 49710 days. Obviously the counter isn't in seconds (it's in "jiffies"). Guess how long a jiffy is. I've been told that this problem has been fixed in the 2.4 kernel. Obviously it's too early to see the results of this fix. Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Apr 21 21:10: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44B8337B43E; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 21:09:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f3M49vM41982; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 21:09:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 21:09:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Message-Id: <200104220409.f3M49vM41982@freefall.freebsd.org> To: riccardo@torrini.org, kris@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: misc/26744: Unable to send mail to FreeBSD.org from home and from work Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Synopsis: Unable to send mail to FreeBSD.org from home and from work State-Changed-From-To: open->closed State-Changed-By: kris State-Changed-When: Sat Apr 21 21:07:40 PDT 2001 State-Changed-Why: This is an anti-spam measure which is in common use -- use your ISP's outbound mail server instead of sending mail directly. You will have problems with many other sites on the internet unless you do. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=26744 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Apr 21 21:58:44 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A357E37B422 for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 21:58:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3M4wFk54718; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 21:58:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Wes Peters" Cc: "Szilveszter Adam" , Subject: RE: Funding large Open Source projects (was Windriver, Slackware) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 21:58:15 -0700 Message-ID: <008901c0cae8$d6d3c4c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <3AE127D0.E935F8B9@softweyr.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: wes [mailto:wes]On Behalf Of Wes Peters >> Here in Portland OR, the misguided tree-huggers that apparently >> control city government all hate automobiles... >> >> Their belief is that if they make the roads as uncomfortable as >> possible to drive on (ie: as congested as possible) that people will >> give up their cars and ride busses. I assume that this idea >> actually does work, in a limited fashion, or they wouldn't keep >> doing it. > >What, you assume they're NOT crazy? That's a bad assumption. > Regretfully, I have to assume they aren't - because they have been smart enough to stir up all the rednecks every time a roads issue comes up on the ballot to vote it down. Of course, when they are doing it then, the rallying cry is "no more of my tax money to the dang government" Funny thing is that there's never a money shortage when it comes to expanding the (half empty) light rail and bus system. :-( A few cooler heads have published studies that show that building more roads has given us more bang for the transportation buck every time, but those are generally quashed in the news here and forgotten during elections. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message