Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNU Grep & Sed: Fallout Within The GNU FSF Camp

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by BoTuLoX View Post
    One does not simply tease Fallout players with a Linux port in the title without major disappointment after discovering it's not what we thought.
    That's the point. Don't use this word in the future if it's not related to the greatest game ever made, please.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by nslay View Post
      If they really wanted to use BSD code, then so be it. It wouldn't affect the existing BSD projects in any way (i.e. they would still be open source).

      BSD code will live on to solve real problems in corporate, government, academic and open source environments (and already has). I mean, imagine the applications of LAPACK and BLAS (used by everyone) for example ... now try imagining the same for GSL.
      LAPACK:
      http://translate.google.com/translat...Fwiki%2FLAPACK
      LAPACK (Linear Algebra PACKage) - Library open source containing solvers main tasks of linear algebra . Written in Fortran using another library BLAS .

      There are also counterparts, maintain or even extend the functionality and provide better performance:

      Intel MKL [1]
      AMD ACML [2]
      Sun Performance Library [3]
      NAG's LAPACK [4]
      HP's mLib [5]

      Some implementations have support for parallel execution of functions on a multiprocessor computer systems with shared memory. Analog computer with distributed memory are libraries ScaLAPACK [6] and PLAPACK [7] .

      Use BSD. Surrender to eternal suckage.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by kazetsukai View Post
        Here though lies a true statement: Most GUIs that are pleasant to 99.999% of human beings are 99.999% unpleasant to people that actually want to get something real done.
        And 93.051% of all statistics are just made up.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
          LAPACK:
          http://translate.google.com/translat...Fwiki%2FLAPACK



          Use BSD. Surrender to eternal suckage.
          LAPACK is BSD licensed and everyone uses it. Who uses GSL?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by nslay View Post
            LAPACK is BSD licensed and everyone uses it. Who uses GSL?

            I see, you can't read - everyone has forked it and closed it down. Who uses LAPACK except BSD?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post

              I see, you can't read - everyone has forked it and closed it down. Who uses LAPACK except BSD?
              Those specialty ones are for high performance computing. Matlab, for example, still uses the original netlib version (BSD licensed). Don't believe me? Purchase Matlab and look in their library directory. I think octave uses LAPACK and BLAS (also the BSDL versions) also ...

              Nobody uses GSL and why would you? If you're a developer (open source or not) and you want to use your own license ... would you pick GSL to do your math computations? GSL is not free. It's fine if you use GPL though.

              And let's not forget other high impact libraries such as libpng (also BSDL) ...

              EDIT: I'm mistaken, libpng is not BSDL.

              My point is that I suspect that BSDL code (particularly when dealing with libraries) will be preferred over GPL and LGPL code ... and subsequently be more widely adopted and more widely used to solve everything from trivial to big problems.
              Last edited by nslay; 12-26-2012, 10:16 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                i vote for the WTFPL licence

                note this topic is not about licences, but about FSF and GNU

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by gens View Post
                  note this topic is not about licences, but about FSF and GNU
                  Except you can't criticize the gnu bureaucracy on phoronix, which is why gnu grep's and gsed's maintainer stepped down and why gnutls is no longer a part of gnu.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by gens View Post
                    i vote for the WTFPL licence

                    note this topic is not about licences, but about FSF and GNU
                    I'm apologize for my digressions.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                      Except you can't criticize the gnu bureaucracy on phoronix, which is why gnu grep's and gsed's maintainer stepped down and why gnutls is no longer a part of gnu.
                      by all means bash on
                      i'm just saying a license has nothing to do with the organization that made it

                      im also the first to say that the FSF way (american way) of doing things is bad for everybody
                      at least from what i see is their way

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by gens View Post
                        by all means bash on
                        i'm just saying a license has nothing to do with the organization that made it
                        Who's bashing? You have two instances in a short time of people becoming fed up with the bureaucracy that surrounds one man. Normal organizations would examine and rectify the situation, but as it's Richard Milhous Stallman, nothing will be done.

                        im also the first to say that the FSF way (american way) of doing things is bad for everybody
                        at least from what i see is their way
                        pretty much

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Do grep and sed require much upkeep these days? I figured the code base was pretty much set by now.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by vsteel View Post
                            Do grep and sed require much upkeep these days? I figured the code base was pretty much set by now.
                            Yea, I had the same impression. Those are basic tools that have been around for a long, long while, why do they need that much maintenance? Does /bin/true also require that much of it?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                              Remove all GNU software from your computer (not GPL-licensed, not FSF-endorsed, only the "GNU operating system" stuff) and see how far you get with that Seriously, try it, just for a laugh.

                              Anyway, as was commented elsewhere, this is a tempest in a teapot. A maintainer stepped down, but made it clear that he still supports the goals of the project. Big deal...

                              real GNU software? What about those things which are only gnu by name? Like glibc? gcc? gnutls? Grub?

                              That said, you can go really far without gnu. Xorg is not gnu, KDE is not gnu, Qt is not gnu, Linux, perl, python is not gnu. Zsh, busybox, syslinux not gnu.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by energyman View Post
                                real GNU software? What about those things which are only gnu by name? Like glibc? gcc? gnutls? Grub?
                                Ehh? GCC and Glibc most definately are official GNU software.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X