Eric S. Raymond Calls LLVM The "Superior Compiler" To GCC

[SystemCrasher]

And how does a rootkit being oss or proprietary makes it any more (or less) acceptable?

Very simple. Its just amusing how proprietary footpads could totally lack imagination.

Imagine system, where you, administrator, deliberately placed invisible traps. Thanks to rootkit technologies traps could be invisible and unexpected, not reported by standard OS tools, etc. Now attacker would break into system but there will be some catch: system will not do what intruder expects but rather monitor/intercept/subvert unrequested activity, alert admins and so on. Can you imagine you did unlink() to trash logs, it reported success but then rather alerted admin, took snapshot and initialized shutdown to minimize impact?

I do not see why it is fundamentally wrong to greet attackers with their own tools, this could be very nice showstopper for some badass .

[geearf]

It not a very difficult philosophical concept. Not giving something is different from removing something.
Example: "Giving 1$ to someone is bad, because you are taking 1$ from him compared to the situation where you give him 2$".
It's retarded. Giving 1$ is good, giving 2$ is better. But 1$ is still good. Giving software is good, giving software and sources is better, but software is still good. The base level, in each case, is giving nothing. You have to compare to that.

Well I compare to what software used to be, which was software + sources.
Also, in these days of PRISM and co software without sources is not good to me... so your example is not a great one.

[erendorn]

That's too philosophical for me, so I'll stop at that.
Just remember that software did not start without giving source code to its users...

It not a very difficult philosophical concept. Not giving something is different from removing something.
Example: "Giving 1$ to someone is bad, because you are taking 1$ from him compared to the situation where you give him 2$".
It's retarded. Giving 1$ is good, giving 2$ is better. But 1$ is still good. Giving software is good, giving software and sources is better, but software is still good. The base level, in each case, is giving nothing. You have to compare to that.

[geearf]

To remove something from you have to have it in the first place. You never had the option, so it can't be removed.

That's too philosophical for me, so I'll stop at that.
Just remember that software did not start without giving source code to its users...

[MoonMoon]

But they DO remove things. For one they remove the option of having a 3rd party extend the original program, or fix it.

To remove something from you have to have it in the first place. You never had the option, so it can't be removed.

[geearf]

Yesterday it was murder, now it's rape (oh wait, and murder again). Proprietary licenses do not hurt people. End of story. You might believe they contribute less to the total welfare (not always the case, but it doesn't matter), but they don't remove anything to anyone, so they are not bad.
And how does a rootkit being oss or proprietary makes it any more (or less) acceptable? it has nothing to do with it.
Stop comparing killing and raping to using proprietary license, it makes a fool out of you.

Hmmm.
Let me first that I don't believe that any kind of license relate at all to murder, rape or any horrendous crime like these.

But they DO remove things. For one they remove the option of having a 3rd party extend the original program, or fix it.
If you could only fix your item X at the manufacturer, I assume without competition the price would not be the same (think cars, watches, etc).
And of course, others alike.

[erendorn]

but if you think that raping woman is a bad thing and everybody else in your culture things its the opposite, if you have balls and dont get killed for it you will say harshly that this is totaly wrong and that when you see it happen you should stop in this case you would most likely if not 5 others stand around with weapons or something threatening you, even phisilcy interfer.

So maybe each sold copy of a proprietary software is not so bad than a rape, but if you have 1mio times smaller crimes like rootkits (sony) and stuff like that, it adds up to a bigger crime. That said its hard to compare stuff like raping so take this comparsion not to serious.

Yesterday it was murder, now it's rape (oh wait, and murder again). Proprietary licenses do not hurt people. End of story. You might believe they contribute less to the total welfare (not always the case, but it doesn't matter), but they don't remove anything to anyone, so they are not bad.
And how does a rootkit being oss or proprietary makes it any more (or less) acceptable? it has nothing to do with it.
Stop comparing killing and raping to using proprietary license, it makes a fool out of you.

[geearf]

Stallman isn't doing anything to solve the legality issues.

What?
That's what he does most of his times.
Have you not seen his speeches about patents in various countries.
Or his speech for WSIS in Tunis for example.
But he does that only by speaking, so it's fairly difficult to fight back the ones that buy politicians..

[SystemCrasher]

Forcing Sony to contribute back code to FreeBSD wouldn't make our AMD graphics support any better.

Fortunately I do not care what would happen to BSDs. IIRC, these days FreeBSD open drivers are mostly poor quality ripoff of vintage Linux code and most of other BSDs are slowly drifting in same direction.

That is AMD's problem, not the BSDs problem they don't support their cards.

1) BSDs market share is nuff void. Seriosuly, if we take a look on web stats, there're just few thousands of users or so. That's for WHOLE PLANET. Only some of these are using AMD cards and they're usually very modest in their requirements (becasue BSDs suck at graphics), do not care about high-performance computing and so on. Needless to say it means money loss is negligible and does not even covers driver development costs. There're Haiku, Minix, MenuetOS and load of others. Obviously no company can support all of them at once without quickly going bankrupt.
2) There're other BSDs. Somehow, OpenBSD guys tend to get angry if you dare to tell something like "nvidia". They definitely consider it as some swearing! .
3) There is also Intel. They do not care about BSDs either. And somehow integrated graphics is more than enough for most of notebooks and desktops of modest users.
4) BSD nuts like you are thinking its okay to stick to proprietary nvidia blobs rather than try to develop open drivers. Good luck with this approach, silly proprietary footpads.

They don't give us enough documentation to write it ourselves, so we have to piggyback off the Linux driver.

To begin with, BSDs simply do not have resources to do these jobs. Only few corps dealing with BSDs. Ironically they only choose BSD crap because they can close source and do not share improvements. Sounds like dead end road...

They also hire people to work on the Linux driver, but not one AMD employee contributes to the BSDs.

In Linux we do care about decent graphics stack and high performance computations. We care it to be open as well. Linux devs have created quite powerful and cool backend with modern features, matching current state of art of hardware. Something BSD nuts are hopelessly trying to rip off right now.

Just get the difference: even such useless creature like me hates to be "consumer" and I always trying to upgrade to "maker" and do what I can to help others to improve things, at least what impacts me directly. Say, Oibaf recently got issue with his llvm build. I reported it in matter of few hours. Becasue I care about how it would compute on my systems. And you... just praising some proprietary fucks like nvidia. That's where we differ so much.

The fact is that Orbis's proprietary code is probably rather useless, tailored especially to the graphics chip of the PS4, and relies on things we simply can't make any use of.

You see, Sony had to do it on their own... probably becasue BSDs state of graphics historically has been awful shit. So it is easier to write something new from scratch than fix this horrible crap. In Linux, some years ago, devs finally got similar idea and that's where DRM+KMS saga started. It took heck a lot of time and efforts of many people, but these days it comes to powerful, modern and featured backend which could be used to build modern systems with modern graphics, do accelerated computations and so on. Linux devs could be proud of it. It looks really respectable to my taste. BSDs on other hand mostly ignored it ... until driver devs got used to these new interfaces and started dropping legacy crap here and there. That's where BSD nuts noticed something goes wrong. So now they're in hurry to do at least something about it.

The GPL is Marxist, as is the FSF and RMS.

Somehow, if you will be able to THINK rather than be scaredy cat who afraids some WORDS, you can notice Marx had some valid points. Basically both RMS and Marx recognized how humans are working and what is their motivation. As simple as that.

And I think you haven't got it: in Linux and in other really opensourced projects people *cooperate*, not *compete*. It is basically like this: there're common goals to achieve and people are trying to get there. Trying to help each other since they all are interested in same outcome. Somehow, GPL makes capitalists far less poisonous and far more productive .

The fact that LLVM/Clang is superior to GCC proves the point.

The only prob is all this buzz mostly comes from bunch of proprietary footpads...

GPL'd programs become massive, ugly and unmaintainable unless put up with careful quality control.

As someone who is very well aware of software development cycles and so on I dare to tell all software is more or less identical in this regard. Say, openssh after all these years turned into swiss army knife with 120 blades. So you have awkward port forwarder, shitty VPN, strange file xfer and so on. Yet it eats CPU like mad on bots bruteforce and could use unsafe outdated protocol versions. And protocol haves bunch of long standing issues like numerous leakages about session activity. As you can see, even OpenBSD guys can be like this.

The Linux kernel itself is full of non-portable GCC-isms, I don't know of any other compiler that can currently build it.

On other hand it warrants I will get opensource SDK for that new shiny board. So I'm in mood to call it feature as well as bug at same time. I'm really not interested in getting blob-only compiler "because compiler license allows it" since it likely to be built for some some inconvenient OS, etc and I or some maintainers, etc stand no chance to rebuild it for MY system. So it's not like if I welcome your stinky blobs and BSD license.

Clang comes close, but falls short. Screen wasn't updated for many years, allowing TMUX to come along and prove superiority. Rather than fix screen, someone made byobu, a wrapper for screen.

TBH I don't really care about these.

Similarly ALSA is a horribly broken audio system using blocking I/O, so Pulseaudio has to wrap around it and referee the sound inputs, and everyone knows the glaring issues with Pulseaudio.

Somehow, BSD nuts pretend they know Linux problems better than we do. Yet, PulseAudio can recognize I plugged earphones to notebook so it can change volume. It can also adjust volumer per program, which is handy since not each and every program has got obvuius volume controls. And best of all there is even GUI to set up these things. So I do not have to go deep into internals of sound system to adjust very basic things. Come on and show me better solutions for desktop.

All because the kernel devs didn't want to stick with OSS, and improve the FOSS version. Then v4 was released under GPL for Linux. Does Linux use it by default? No! Even fucking Ubuntu won't allow its use.

Because we simply do not need some stuff where someone thinks its okay to be first class citizen while we should be second class citizens. This way never works with Linux. Linux isnt a proprietary corps footpad. Its strong project and nobody welcomes approach where it stays second class citizen compared to some proprietary solution. So releasing under GPL is cool but it looks like if it has been to late and problem has been solved other way. That's why I like Linux devs. They always manage to keep proprietary pests under control. Something BSD projects can never afford.

Seriously, what more examples do you fucking need?

Kinda funny yelling of BSD footpad who even fails to consider how his silly here-and-now actions would map into future and how it will affect other processes. The only prob is that you're greedy and short-sighted. And it does not looks like if it could be fun to cooperate with someone like you. TBH I do not think such approach will get you too far.

[TeamBlackFox]

Linux has a high market share in servers and embedded business, and our customers beat on us regularly for support. I don't remember ever being asked for BSD support.

That said, when we kicked off the open source graphics effort there was a lot more focus on X drivers directly hitting hardware (where pretty much the same code ran on Linux & BSD) and the drm subsystem was maintained outside the Linux kernel tree and again was fairly portable between Linux & BSD. As the graphics stack became more capable and more complex (picking up ttm was probably one of the bigger changes) it became wired more deeply into the OS and so porting became more of an issue.

Finally there used to be a BSD developer who was *very* active focusing on the graphics stack -- IIRC he needed to step down from that but nobody was able to step up and put in the same amount of time.

So... when we started everything we did for Linux pretty much benefited BSD equally. The world changed after that, so arguably we should have shifted our focus a bit and worked directly on BSD, but see first point.

You're correct. No offense to you, but I hate AMD graphics and never was a fan for ATi either. Why? I know engineers at Nvidia, they spend a lot more time on polishing things and optimizing the driver > kernel < hardware interactions and frankly, I'm not concerned about free/proprietary drivers. If it works, its fine with me. I only use FreeBSD as opposed to Windows because I find Windows a piece of dreck. I don't use OS X because I don't like OS X anymore ( I quit shortly after Mountain Lion was released ) and I don't use Linux because of systemd, GNU and a lot of other bs I won't get into.