Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48

Thread: What is the future of the BSD?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2

    Default What is the future of the BSD?

    What is the future of the BSD?

    I ask this because OpenBSD had no money to pay the electricity bill and would be closed if had not appeared donor to pay this bill.

    Not worth investing in an operating system that is about to be terminated.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4

    Default

    The future of BSD is only marginally impacted by OpenBSD, i would figure.

    Even without monetary donations, it would be unlikely OpenBSD would disappear. More likely, they would drop a lot of architectures.

    The future of BSD is quite good. All BSD technology can be utilised by every human being on the planet, while getting nothing in return from the GPL camp and only marginally from companies. So without these dependencies, BSD appears to be thriving in its own way. FreeBSD development certainly became more interesting over the past few years.

    I know many Linux evangalists would like BSD to disappear -- together with everything else that does not conform to their world view -- but considering the track record thus far, it would seem unlikely this will actually happen. Due to the deliberate bullying from various sources, the development of BSD is much slower. But in general BSD developers are older and more mature than the average Linux contributor, which helps to compensate for the lower development resources. Despite all the hostility, FreeBSD is one of the most advanced operating systems around, with many unique features and borrowed features like the best ZFS implementation, as well as the pf firewall from OpenBSD and D-trace from Sun. Due to it's liberal license anyone can benefit from BSD, friend and foe. In the GPL-scene, it is a black and white world; 'Either you're with us -- or you're with the terrorists' like George W. Bush said.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by assembler
    I ask this because OpenBSD had no money to pay the electricity bill and would be closed if had not appeared donor to pay this bill.
    That was the case until some retard wasted $20,000 on them. But luckily, that was only once and they’ll soon have more unpaid electrical bills.

    Quote Originally Posted by assembler
    Not worth investing in an operating system that is about to be terminated.
    In general, it’s not worth investigating any BSD licensed as their license results in stagnation and or closure of the source.

    Quote Originally Posted by CiPHER
    The future of BSD is only marginally impacted by OpenBSD, i would figure.

    The future of BSD is quite good. All BSD technology can be utilised by every human being on the planet, while getting nothing in return from the GPL camp and only marginally from companies. So without these dependencies, BSD appears to be thriving in its own way. FreeBSD development certainly became more interesting over the past few years.
    True that OpenBSD only marginally impacts the rest of BSD. However, it’s not just OpenBSD that’s in trouble. NetBSD and DragonflyBSD for example have barely any users and almost don’t exists. They They no longer have any clear roadmap or project goals for example, NetBSD’s goal used to be portability but now, Linux has more architectures then it and farthermore there has been no new NetBSD archs from 2010 to present. NetBSD has instead focused on fruitless and brain dead goals such as implementing a Lua interpreter into the kernel and mading possible for loading kernel mode drivers written in Javascript (a reciepe for NetBSD to be Windows insecurty extreme with unpopularity). DragonflyBSD claims to focus on SMP and yet it’s SMP is still worse then FreeBSD who’s SMP is already terrible. DragonflyBSD has become a Linux wannabe and has implemented Linux technologies and copies into the base (ie Linux Kernel Threads, HAMMER (copy of BTRFS), Modular kernel, etc).

    It’s intreseting to note that NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are only used on Vmware on the developer’s MacBook Pro. The same goes for FreeBSD and OpenBSD except that they are also used on developer’s experiemental and hobby servers. Linux developers in contrast is used on virtually all of a Linux developer’s bare metal.

    Quote Originally Posted by CiPHER
    FreeBSD development certainly became more interesting over the past few years.
    That’s just a temporary surge. It has considerably slowed since late 2013. Those developments are Bhyve, PKGNG, etc which are nothing more then copies of old Linux tech. Things like CLANG replacing GCC are more set back then an advancement.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    9

    Default Shut up

    Quote Originally Posted by waydstein View Post
    That was the case until some retard wasted $20,000 on them. But luckily, that was only once and theyíll soon have more unpaid electrical bills.



    In general, itís not worth investigating any BSD licensed as their license results in stagnation and or closure of the source.



    True that OpenBSD only marginally impacts the rest of BSD. However, itís not just OpenBSD thatís in trouble. NetBSD and DragonflyBSD for example have barely any users and almost donít exists. They They no longer have any clear roadmap or project goals for example, NetBSDís goal used to be portability but now, Linux has more architectures then it and farthermore there has been no new NetBSD archs from 2010 to present. NetBSD has instead focused on fruitless and brain dead goals such as implementing a Lua interpreter into the kernel and mading possible for loading kernel mode drivers written in Javascript (a reciepe for NetBSD to be Windows insecurty extreme with unpopularity). DragonflyBSD claims to focus on SMP and yet itís SMP is still worse then FreeBSD whoís SMP is already terrible. DragonflyBSD has become a Linux wannabe and has implemented Linux technologies and copies into the base (ie Linux Kernel Threads, HAMMER (copy of BTRFS), Modular kernel, etc).

    Itís intreseting to note that NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are only used on Vmware on the developerís MacBook Pro. The same goes for FreeBSD and OpenBSD except that they are also used on developerís experiemental and hobby servers. Linux developers in contrast is used on virtually all of a Linux developerís bare metal.



    Thatís just a temporary surge. It has considerably slowed since late 2013. Those developments are Bhyve, PKGNG, etc which are nothing more then copies of old Linux tech. Things like CLANG replacing GCC are more set back then an advancement.
    Man, shut your fucking mouth! You're passing on misinformation and fanboylism!!

    Folks, don't listen him!! That opinion is partial because he's a hater! Haters can't be inpartial, can't discuss honestly and technically about!!!
    I really hate dishonest and malicious people!!!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waydstein View Post
    That was the case until some retard wasted $20,000 on them. But luckily, that was only once and theyíll soon have more unpaid electrical bills.



    In general, itís not worth investigating any BSD licensed as their license results in stagnation and or closure of the source.



    True that OpenBSD only marginally impacts the rest of BSD. However, itís not just OpenBSD thatís in trouble. NetBSD and DragonflyBSD for example have barely any users and almost donít exists. They They no longer have any clear roadmap or project goals for example, NetBSDís goal used to be portability but now, Linux has more architectures then it and farthermore there has been no new NetBSD archs from 2010 to present. NetBSD has instead focused on fruitless and brain dead goals such as implementing a Lua interpreter into the kernel and mading possible for loading kernel mode drivers written in Javascript (a reciepe for NetBSD to be Windows insecurty extreme with unpopularity). DragonflyBSD claims to focus on SMP and yet itís SMP is still worse then FreeBSD whoís SMP is already terrible. DragonflyBSD has become a Linux wannabe and has implemented Linux technologies and copies into the base (ie Linux Kernel Threads, HAMMER (copy of BTRFS), Modular kernel, etc).

    Itís intreseting to note that NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are only used on Vmware on the developerís MacBook Pro. The same goes for FreeBSD and OpenBSD except that they are also used on developerís experiemental and hobby servers. Linux developers in contrast is used on virtually all of a Linux developerís bare metal.



    Thatís just a temporary surge. It has considerably slowed since late 2013. Those developments are Bhyve, PKGNG, etc which are nothing more then copies of old Linux tech. Things like CLANG replacing GCC are more set back then an advancement.
    If anything is brain dead, it's definitely you. Be gone troll!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waydstein View Post
    That was the case until some retard wasted $20,000 on them. But luckily, that was only once and theyíll soon have more unpaid electrical bills.



    In general, itís not worth investigating any BSD licensed as their license results in stagnation and or closure of the source.



    True that OpenBSD only marginally impacts the rest of BSD. However, itís not just OpenBSD thatís in trouble. NetBSD and DragonflyBSD for example have barely any users and almost donít exists. They They no longer have any clear roadmap or project goals for example, NetBSDís goal used to be portability but now, Linux has more architectures then it and farthermore there has been no new NetBSD archs from 2010 to present. NetBSD has instead focused on fruitless and brain dead goals such as implementing a Lua interpreter into the kernel and mading possible for loading kernel mode drivers written in Javascript (a reciepe for NetBSD to be Windows insecurty extreme with unpopularity). DragonflyBSD claims to focus on SMP and yet itís SMP is still worse then FreeBSD whoís SMP is already terrible. DragonflyBSD has become a Linux wannabe and has implemented Linux technologies and copies into the base (ie Linux Kernel Threads, HAMMER (copy of BTRFS), Modular kernel, etc).

    Itís intreseting to note that NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are only used on Vmware on the developerís MacBook Pro. The same goes for FreeBSD and OpenBSD except that they are also used on developerís experiemental and hobby servers. Linux developers in contrast is used on virtually all of a Linux developerís bare metal.



    Thatís just a temporary surge. It has considerably slowed since late 2013. Those developments are Bhyve, PKGNG, etc which are nothing more then copies of old Linux tech. Things like CLANG replacing GCC are more set back then an advancement.
    Shut your fucking mouth! You are disseminating misinformation and fanboylism!! You are a hater and haters are not impartial.
    Folks you can't trust in haters!!!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waydstein View Post
    That was the case until some retard wasted $20,000 on them. But luckily, that was only once and theyíll soon have more unpaid electrical bills.



    In general, itís not worth investigating any BSD licensed as their license results in stagnation and or closure of the source.



    True that OpenBSD only marginally impacts the rest of BSD. However, itís not just OpenBSD thatís in trouble. NetBSD and DragonflyBSD for example have barely any users and almost donít exists. They They no longer have any clear roadmap or project goals for example, NetBSDís goal used to be portability but now, Linux has more architectures then it and farthermore there has been no new NetBSD archs from 2010 to present. NetBSD has instead focused on fruitless and brain dead goals such as implementing a Lua interpreter into the kernel and mading possible for loading kernel mode drivers written in Javascript (a reciepe for NetBSD to be Windows insecurty extreme with unpopularity). DragonflyBSD claims to focus on SMP and yet itís SMP is still worse then FreeBSD whoís SMP is already terrible. DragonflyBSD has become a Linux wannabe and has implemented Linux technologies and copies into the base (ie Linux Kernel Threads, HAMMER (copy of BTRFS), Modular kernel, etc).

    Itís intreseting to note that NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are only used on Vmware on the developerís MacBook Pro. The same goes for FreeBSD and OpenBSD except that they are also used on developerís experiemental and hobby servers. Linux developers in contrast is used on virtually all of a Linux developerís bare metal.



    Thatís just a temporary surge. It has considerably slowed since late 2013. Those developments are Bhyve, PKGNG, etc which are nothing more then copies of old Linux tech. Things like CLANG replacing GCC are more set back then an advancement.
    Yet another account created by the loser from aboutthebsds.wordpress.com... (kraftman, Pawlerson, endman, BSDSucksDicks, LinuxAnalsBSD, etc).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    95

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waydstein View Post
    That was the case until some retard wasted $20,000 on them. But luckily, that was only once and theyíll soon have more unpaid electrical bills.
    Or will they? By the way, someone who disagrees with you is not a 'retard'; they are someone with a different view.

    In general, itís not worth investigating any BSD licensed as their license results in stagnation and or closure of the source.
    Did it? BSD begun in 1976 and it's still carrying on in earnest nearly 4 decades later.

    Certain parts have been borrowed from BSD (i.e. the TCP/IP stack without which the internet would've been set back decades) but the whole generally remains open.

    True that OpenBSD only marginally impacts the rest of BSD. However, itís not just OpenBSD thatís in trouble. NetBSD and DragonflyBSD for example have barely any users and almost donít exists. They They no longer have any clear roadmap or project goals for example, NetBSDís goal used to be portability but now, Linux has more architectures then it and farthermore there has been no new NetBSD archs from 2010 to present. NetBSD has instead focused on fruitless and brain dead goals such as implementing a Lua interpreter into the kernel and mading possible for loading kernel mode drivers written in Javascript (a reciepe for NetBSD to be Windows insecurty extreme with unpopularity). DragonflyBSD claims to focus on SMP and yet itís SMP is still worse then FreeBSD whoís SMP is already terrible. DragonflyBSD has become a Linux wannabe and has implemented Linux technologies and copies into the base (ie Linux Kernel Threads, HAMMER (copy of BTRFS), Modular kernel, etc).
    Net and Dragonfly have a small but loyal set of users. They are succeeding in their goals. NetBSD remains incredibly portable and has acquired what appears to be an alliance with MINIX 3 to advance new kernel technology such as RUMP kernels. Dragonfly continues on its path to create a system that's designed for clusters and brings microkernel inspiration from AmigaOS to BSD.

    There is no such plan to load kernel mode drivers written in Javascript. Where on earth did you get that idea?

    DragonflyBSD's LKT are Lightweight Kernel Threads, not 'Linux Kernel Threads'. More blatantly wrong nonsense. As for HAMMER, it predates Btrfs, and, like Btrfs, was a clone/inspired-by of ZFS. DragonflyBSD and FreeBSD both have fantastic SMP.

    Itís intreseting to note that NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are only used on Vmware on the developerís MacBook Pro. The same goes for FreeBSD and OpenBSD except that they are also used on developerís experiemental and hobby servers. Linux developers in contrast is used on virtually all of a Linux developerís bare metal.
    It is interesting that are you blatantly wrong. Most developers working on BSD run it on their bare metal, as desktops and as servers.

    Thatís just a temporary surge. It has considerably slowed since late 2013. Those developments are Bhyve, PKGNG, etc which are nothing more then copies of old Linux tech. Things like CLANG replacing GCC are more set back then an advancement.
    It's a substantial surge. Bhyve and pkgng are no more copies of Linux tech than anything else is. And Clang replacing gcc is an improvement - gcc is stagnant nowadays.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SuperUserLand
    Posts
    526

    Default

    bitrot hopefully... let all these bsd's and opensolaris's join the reactos/haiku 'who gives a shit' list

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JX8p View Post
    And Clang replacing gcc is an improvement - gcc is stagnant nowadays.
    This is incorrect. Recent revisions of GCC have improved debugging information quality beyond of LLVM.
    It is only stagnant on BSD and Apple, which stayed with outdated GPL2 version. Its their problem - not only the BSD platform is undermanned and bugged, it is also highly license intolerant.


    Quote Originally Posted by JX8p View Post
    Certain parts have been borrowed from BSD (i.e. the TCP/IP stack without which the internet would've been set back decades)
    Since when has windumbs become *internet*? In fact, one can extrapolate BSD helped microsoft to start internet conquest via infamous IE EEE.
    Last edited by brosis; 02-13-2014 at 08:39 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •