Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 07:16:19 -0600 (CST) From: "Sean C. Farley" <scf@FreeBSD.org> To: Andrey Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Linux kernel compatability Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1101051345530.89052@thor.farley.org> In-Reply-To: <20110105175926.GA2101@vniz.net> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1101031017110.1450@desktop> <20110103220153.69cf59e0@kan.dnsalias.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1101031859290.1450@desktop> <20110104082252.45bb5e7f@kan.dnsalias.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1101041030120.1450@desktop> <20110105124045.6a0ddd1a@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110105175926.GA2101@vniz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Andrey Chernov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:40:45PM -0500, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
>>> I have heard this argument about the linuxulator and what we're
>>> really talking about is slipping FreeBSD marketshare. I don't share
>>> the view that the linuxulator futhered this slip but rather my view
>>> is that it allows us to stay relevant in areas where companies can
>>> not justify an independent FreeBSD effort. Adobe is a good example
>>> of this.
>>
>> It compounded the Adobe's reluctance to work on portable flash player.
>
> I agree with Alexander even more. We don't need _any_ Linux emulator
> in the tree and even in the ports. Flash player is a good example of
> how Linux emulator is harmful: instead of sending tons of complaints
> to Adobe to force them to make native FreeBSD version, users tends to
> install Flash via emulator and got all its pain as result.
Well, there have been some requests[1] sent to Adobe for a native
version especially after running Flash through emulation. This is even
after having to register to vote or attach a comment for the bug. It is
the fourth most popular Flash bug.
If anyone wants to vote for it, not just submit a comment to it, then I
want to mention that two votes are (at least were) allowed per bug. I
should ask some people at work to vote for it.
> BTW, I have nothing against having source level Linux compatibility in
> some places, because resulting binary will be FreeBSD one in any case, but
> I'm strongly against executable binary compatibility level.
While you may be correct, there are some items to note:
1. Wine has not stopped Adobe from providing Linux binaries.
2. Nvidia[2] provided a FreeBSD driver and binaries after people were
attempting to run the Linux driver in emulation.
Sean
1. http://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-1060
2. Thank you, Nvidia!
--
scf@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1101051345530.89052>