Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should There Be A Unified BSD Operating System?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
    You'd like us to believe that you are a liberal, but it is clear from your arguments that you are not.

    In every conversation on this forum about anything licensed under a permissive license, your stand is clearly made for the authoritarian nature of the gpl.
    Oh but I am liberal when it comes to licences, I will defend the code authors/owners right to choose the licence or to keep it proprietary, I have argued against people saying proprietary use of BSD licenced code is stealing and other such nonsense right here on Phoronix. Please point me to my arguments where I state otherwise. Just a few posts back I made my personal licence preferences clear, which vary depending on context.

    My favourite OS is Haiku which is permissively licenced (MIT)

    What is the 'authoritative' nature of GPL? It's licence, a set of conditions for use just like any other licence.

    As for why I think GPL makes for a better licence to cooperate under for companies I've made that clear also, which is that companies is generally the equivalent of the most selfish greedy person you can find and they pretty much never want to give anything away, particularly when it can gain a competitor and this is where the GPL comes in handy.

    And it is sad, I've read numerous times of company representatives saying they've saved up so and so much money from using open source. If they would only donate a small percentage of those savings back then I have no doubt open source in all forms and licences would flourish.

    Of course you don't give a shit about this either way since you are just here trolling.

    Comment


    • #77
      By the way, staalmannen, you were so full of sh*t when you said this:
      Originally posted by staalmannen View Post
      Secondly, the most probable reason why BSD on i386 did not win over Linux despite being technically far more advanced for several years is spelled "UNIX wars". There was lots of legal uncertainty at the time about BSD and this really hurt it. If BSD i386 had been available without this issue it is very likely that Linus simply would have picked this for his OS and never developed Linux.
      It wasn't a question of 386BSD not being available without the lawsuit but the fact that it wasn't available at all two years _before_ the whole thing.

      It was finished in -92. A year _after_ Linux. The legal trouble began in -93.[1][2]

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by XorEaxEax View Post
        What is the 'authoritative' nature of GPL?
        Authoritarian, not authoritative. One license offers the freedom of the former Soviet Union, you are free to do whatever you want as long you give up your own rights. One license offers real freedom.

        Learn to tell the difference.

        Of course you don't give a shit about this either way since you are just here trolling.
        yet I have still contributed more lines of code to more OSS projects than you.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by vermaden View Post
          There are hundreds of Linux distributions and several BSD's ... and BSD needs unification?
          The differences in linux distros are mostly in userspace (package management, default DE, etc.), the differences in the BSDs are often in the kernel (and system tools, to some degree).

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
            Authoritarian, not authoritative. One license offers the freedom of the former Soviet Union, you are free to do whatever you want as long you give up your own rights. One license offers real freedom.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
              Authoritarian, not authoritative. One license offers the freedom of the former Soviet Union, you are free to do whatever you want as long you give up your own rights.
              The GPL is a conditional offer of a privilege, subject to the property right of the copyright holder in their copyright. Is that not precisely the same right that must be used to add GPL-incompatible conditions (software patents notwithstanding)?

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                One license offers the freedom of the former Soviet Union, you are free to do whatever you want as long you give up your own rights. One license offers real freedom.
                Cry me a river.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                  One license offers the freedom of the former Soviet Union, you are free to do whatever you want as long you give up your own rights.
                  ...

                  Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                  yet I have still contributed more lines of code to more OSS projects than you.
                  Oh have you now?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Thanks, but no thanks.

                    There's no need to mix Linux and BSD development. If they want something from the bastardized UNIX a.k.a Linux it's their problem. Nobody from this side of the fence gives a damn about their problems.

                    Moreso, since (Free)BSD is an Apple side project nowadays, maybe they can open source their own Quartz display server and some of their Intel drivers, so that their brethren can have the best FOSS in the world.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      uhu, yeah, whatever

                      Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                      You'd like us to believe that you are a liberal, but it is clear from your arguments that you are not.

                      In every conversation on this forum about anything licensed under a permissive license, your stand is clearly made for the authoritarian nature of the gpl.
                      GPL is about freedom, except right to remove freedom. Like any sentient government - person is free to do anything, except removing this freedom. So no fascism is allowed. Yeah, go cry about how authoritarian that is and how you want to shoot and enslave everyone freely.

                      Originally posted by Anarchy View Post
                      Moreso, since (Free)BSD is an Apple side project nowadays, maybe they can open source their own Quartz display server and some of their Intel drivers, so that their brethren can have the best FOSS in the world.
                      Ah, anarchy, yeah, go suck on their lengths more, you are OWNED for life, where did your freedom suddenly go?
                      Last edited by brosis; 02-10-2013, 12:27 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by brosis View Post
                        Ah, anarchy, yeah, go suck on their lengths more, you are OWNED for life, where did your freedom suddenly go?

                        Nowhere. All I need is python, Latex and a decent compiler and I'm good to go. I can do my work on Linux, osx, windows and even freebsd. I don't even need fancy 3D drivers, as long as they can show 2D graphics I'm fine.

                        Where's your freedom? In you pants?

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Sorry for my note in your interested talk, I'm just want to present info about project: FreeBSD KMS for AMD cards
                          Wiki page of a project is HERE
                          Will wait for a coming good working AMD cards on FreeBSD!!!

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X