From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Jan 4 12:57: 3 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB47C37B401 for ; Sat, 4 Jan 2003 12:57:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from bluejay.mail.pas.earthlink.net (bluejay.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7598743EA9 for ; Sat, 4 Jan 2003 12:57:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from pool0130.cvx40-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.42.130] helo=mindspring.com) by bluejay.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18UvLk-0005PG-00; Sat, 04 Jan 2003 12:56:57 -0800 Message-ID: <3E174A4B.7D8D3B18@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 12:55:39 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Glass Cc: Cliff Sarginson , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD's use of GCC (Was: Bystander shot by a spam filter.) References: <200212312041.gBVKfr183480@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org> <3E120659.3D60EB30@mindspring.com> <20030101140530.GA11468@raggedclown.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104112345.02a48b70@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: b1a02af9316fbb217a47c185c03b154d40683398e744b8a42a9a0f1a29bd1a47c57f43a73a35e9be666fa475841a1c7a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass wrote: > OpenBSD pretty much avoids the use of GPLed code except in the > toolchain. I'd like to see them take an even tougher stance, > and eject the GPL from their code base altogether. But while > they removed ipfilter over a much smaller licensing issue, > they have not done the same with GPLed code. Why? One can only > speculate that it's because GCC is now so dominant that > other compilers just aren't obtainable... and also because so > much of the third party software for OpenBSD is dependent > upon GCC as well. A vicious cycle that needs breaking. I believe it's because a tools dependency is an indirect dependency. By trying to treat it as if it were a direct dependency, you sabatoge my argument against direct dependencies on GCC-specific syntax in source files. Please don't do that. > It's simple: It's what I call the "Yosemite Sam Principle." > > Remember the classic cartoon in which Yosemite Sam attempts to get > Bugs Bunny to blow himself up by playing a booby-trapped piano? > > Sam challenges Bugs to play the "pie-anner," which is rigged to > explode when a particular key is pressed. Bugs plays the tune from > the sheet music, but keeps hitting a wrong note and doesn't set > off the explosive. Finally, the frustrated Sam leaps in front of > Bugs, yelling, "No, you stupid rabbit! Like this!" and plays the > tune correctly. > > The explosive goes off. > > This is one of the secrets of open source: One of the ways to get > people to do something right for you is to do it wrong yourself > and let other people's egos intervene. They'll soon do it better > than you could (though, in the case of GCC, not necessarily as > well as it could be done). Do you mind if I steal and republish this (i.e. "can I quote you?")? I will give you credit for originating it, of course. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message