DragonFlyBSD Pulls In AMD Radeon Graphics Code From The Linux 4.7 Kernel

[aht0]

Whatever they did would likely have the same issues that ZFS on Linux has -- compat layer and licensing.

erm..what? Hammer2 comes under BSD license. And it's about to get Boot Environments similar to ZFS. Linux might need BSD emulation layer there tho lol.

No, it doesn't. Furthermore it's DragonflyBSD which was inspired by Linux when comes to scalability.

Nope it's not. M.Dillon did not agree with other FreeBSD dev's about the way SMP should be implemented, so he forked the codebase and went his own way. Install it, see for yourself if it has anything 'inspired by Linux'.

[starshipeleven]

Install it, see for yourself if it has anything 'inspired by Linux'.

It's a bit hard to "see for yourself" if it has something inspired by Linux by just installing it. *BSD distros with a GUI tend to look and work similar to (crappy) Linux distros from a user standpoint.

You would need to look at kernel source, or at the very least dev documentation about the API.

[OneTimeShot]

The BSD license is compatible with the GPL - actually AMD and Intel use that license for their code submissions to the Kernel. The ZFS file system was licensed as CDDL so that it couldn't be used outside OpenSolaris and BSD. As GPL requires you post your changes and bug fixes along with binaries, so GPL is not compatible with BSD.

IIRC, there was a remote vulnerability in SSH for 12 years that Sun fixed in their version, but never reported to the main project because they didn't need to under the BSD license...

[Volta]

Nope it's not. M.Dillon did not agree with other FreeBSD dev's about the way SMP should be implemented, so he forked the codebase and went his own way. Install it, see for yourself if it has anything 'inspired by Linux'.

Probably both of them are inspired by Linux when comes to SMP. I'm sure some work was inspired like NUMA or VFS. However, judging from the benchmarks I probably have to agree with you. Here it is:

The serializing token code is evolving into something quite similar to the "Read-copy-update" feature now available in Linux. Unlike Linux's current RCU implementation, DragonFly's is being implemented such that only processors competing for the same token are affected rather than all processors in the computer.

Since release 1.8 DragonFly has a virtualization mechanism similar to User-mode Linux,^[18] allowing a user to run another kernel in the userland. The virtual kernel (vkernel) is run in completely isolated environment with emulated network and storage interfaces, thus simplifying testing kernel subsystems and clustering features.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DragonFly_BSD

[aht0]

It's a bit hard to "see for yourself" if it has something inspired by Linux by just installing it. *BSD distros with a GUI tend to look and work similar to (crappy) Linux distros from a user standpoint.
You would need to look at kernel source, or at the very least dev documentation about the API.

For the love of God, BSD does not have "distros" and WHY would you need GUI's? Or where? Everything can be configured by text editor on console, which is nothing unheard of while using certain Linux distros, either..

[aht0]

The serializing token code is evolving into something quite similar to the "Read-copy-update" feature now available in Linux. Unlike Linux's current RCU implementation, DragonFly's is being implemented such that only processors competing for the same token are affected rather than all processors in the computer.

'is evolving' implies that it's happening as a natural evolution of development, adjusting the code and approach, then testing for results, adjusting again.. et cetera not just copy-paste the principles.. One could conclude from it that other approaches have been tried and discarded.

Agree on 2nd quote.

However, there can't be too many different ways of implementing SMP, without it hurting performance. So you more or less have to use principles that are also being used elsewhere..

[Volta]

aht0
That's why we were just talking about inspirations.

[tildearrow]

For the love of God, BSD does not have "distros" and WHY would you need GUI's? Or where? Everything can be configured by text editor on console, which is nothing unheard of while using certain Linux distros, either..

User-friendliness. Average Joe does not accustom to working with the command line.

[aht0]

Average Joe would either use Win10 pre-installed/installed somebody else AND not Linux to start with.

What you don't realize is that, apart from certain distros, GUI's of some sort are a "must have" on Linux because things there have become rather complicated, how various system components (puzzle which linux distro essentially is) interact and have put together..Not to mention the little fact that each and every distributor puts their puzzle together differently, so the file system layouts differ - you'll have to query package manager to simply find some config file(s) before you can start.
It's not so on BSD's. So you don't really need GUI's. Adding new WiFI networks through command line (/etc/wpa_supplicant.conf), configuring home router or setting up how the system interacts, command line/text files are sufficient.
"I don't like DE A because it does not have GUI option for function X (like running some specific command upon attaching particular USB device) while DE B has" so common-kind-of-discussion to see among Linux users can be avoided completely. In the end, it stymies YOU less because you are not depending on GUI and random chance that UI designer forgot something.. Once set up you can forget about it and just use.
In a perverse way, it becomes more user friendly.