The PlayStation 4 Does Use The FreeBSD Kernel, Mono

[artivision]

And there's the real point. The people who wrote FreeBSD have released it under the license that they chose to use. Sony is respecting that license. The software in this case stays open, and even if Sony has a pile of private patches hidden away, FreeBSD itself has still benefited from the contributions that they have chosen to share.

I write open-source software in my free time. I generally prefer to release it under a BSD-like license so that individual users AND companies can choose to use it (and possibly contribute patches). I wouldn't be shocked if some of my code was used in closed devices, but it doesn't upset me. I still get to use my own code, and so can anyone else.

Regardless of how a company intends to use it, I've seen blanket bans at previous employers against using ANY GPL-licensed software just because the company was afraid of their primary products being tainted by the license (even if using it in a completely unrelated system). That being said, some of the stuff I've written has been released with GPL v2 or LGPL due to the licenses of some of the software that I've been building against... and the viral nature of GPL has generally rubbed me the wrong way.

What the hell are you talking about??? Don't give definitions for things like freedom when you are back from a bar fight and you are injured in the head!!! GPL doesn't restrict any other program. When you use GPL code you have to free your code to: freee as freeedom!!! Users running closed programs that they don't now what there is inside them, thats bad, especially when a user buys and owns the program. For GPL all closed, restricted, patented knowledge, is considered crime against humanity. As for companies and money, cut your necks and die tomorrow.

[Sergio]

What the hell are you talking about??? Don't give definitions for things like freedom when you are back from a bar fight and you are injured in the head!!! GPL doesn't restrict any other program. When you use GPL code you have to free your code to: freee as freeedom!!! Users running closed programs that they don't now what there is inside them, thats bad, especially when a user buys and owns the program. For GPL all closed, restricted, patented knowledge, is considered crime against humanity. As for companies and money, cut your necks and die tomorrow.

You do own the program; you have the code that ACTUALLY will be executed or interpreted (in case of managed code). You can study exactly what it does by disassembling/debugging. So one could argue that 'closed' source does not even exist.

[mrugiero]

You do own the program; you have the code that ACTUALLY will be executed or interpreted (in case of managed code). You can study exactly what it does by disassembling/debugging. So one could argue that 'closed' source does not even exist.

Ever heard the term "obfuscation"?

[Sergio]

Ever heard the term "obfuscation"?

I think it is completely irrelevant; you still have a copy of what EXACTLY gets executed. Whether it is PRACTICAL to debug enormous software systems is a different matter.

[Guest]

I think it is completely irrelevant; you still have a copy of what EXACTLY gets executed. Whether it is PRACTICAL to debug enormous software systems is a different matter.

It seems bsd fanboys still don't get it: bsd license makes bsd licensed project foolish slaves. They serve others and the only thing they can do is to beg for code.

[Vim_User]

It seems bsd fanboys still don't get it: bsd license makes bsd licensed project foolish slaves. They serve others and the only thing they can do is to beg for code.

Really? Then go ahead, don't support projects that are foolish slaves, remove all permissive licensed code from your systems.

[mrugiero]

Really? Then go ahead, don't support projects that are foolish slaves, remove all permissive licensed code from your systems.

Even though I see your point, and am as tired of self-entitled people who criticizes (actually, insults; a good criticism doesn't bother me) other people's license of choice as you, you should remember using and supporting are two very different things. It's not like he's got to pay to use it or something.

[JX8p]

It seems bsd fanboys still don't get it: bsd license makes bsd licensed project foolish slaves. They serve others and the only thing they can do is to beg for code.

Whilst you live in your fantasy world I'm sure a plethora of BSD devs are delighted at being able to put "Developed the Sony PS4 operating system" amongst many other things on their CV, and get real jobs.

[Ibidem]

Along the same lines as Sergio, Rob Landley once commented on how reverse-engineering a binary system would be simpler than re-doing an unreleased port of GPL code.

[russofris]

Well PS3 also used FreeBSD kernel so it's easy to see them using it in the newer version too.

I recall the PS3 OS being based on Darwin, though I looked into it almost 5 years ago. IIRC, the network and filesystem stacks looked like Darwin, with the biggest difference being that PS3 OS used ELF rather than MACH-O.

I think it's fair to say that the PS3 OS is derived from "BSD", though it is not clear from which branch.