Why FreeBSD Is Liking LLDB For Debugging

[Cthulhux]

(original authors) have the right to the source code of those changes/additions which they can then use to enhance their version or simply continue to work from this enhanced version.

... which is bad for developers involved in creating derivative software as they lose full control over their own work. Basically, the GPL disfranchises developers. Good choice. Good night. (1 a.m. here.)

[ceage]

Still no examples for hardware not working on FreeBSD but on Linux? Not that I had even thought so...

Intel Haswell integrated graphics are not supported.

[Cthulhux]

It exists to make sure that END USERS have the right to the source code, modifying, running and copying the code, as it happens, developers are also end users.

Funnily, that's how the BSD license works (just stare at the large colored diagrams to understand it).

[Cthulhux]

Intel Haswell integrated graphics are not supported.

Good find. Patches are available though. Let's see...

[Guest]

Funnily, that's how the BSD license works (just stare at the large colored diagrams to understand it).

How many times it's needed to explain something to bsd fanboys to make them understand? The GPL license is here to protect the code from being taken by proprietary and bsd folks. It is here to protect end users freedom as well. BSD is only useful when you don't care about end users and when you don't care about competing with other projects. This makes bsd totally anti freedom and anti progression license. You wanted examples of hardware which don't work in bsd. Does Logitech Wireless Gamepad F710 works? It works out of the box in Linux while there are big problems to make it work in Windows 7 64bit.

[Guest]

... which is bad for developers involved in creating derivative software as they lose full control over their own work. Basically, the GPL disfranchises developers. Good choice. Good night. (1 a.m. here.)

Which is great for end users who benefit the most from this. Furthermore, developers don't lose control over their own work at all, so don't spread a FUD. They can do with their own code whatever they want.

[Cthulhux]

Does Logitech Wireless Gamepad F710 works?

Yup.

Which is great for end users who benefit the most from this. Furthermore, developers don't lose control over their own work at all, so don't spread a FUD. They can do with their own code whatever they want.

Which randomly breaks everything, yes.

Oh, wait, no, they can't. They can't, for example, close their source code.

[Sergio]

What is it with you BSD fanatics and lack of understanding licences? You don't even seem to understand your own licence.

If you want to release YOUR code under BSD, then NOTHING is stopping you. As the code author and owner you have the right to release your code under any licence you so wish, under several licences simultaneously even.

And since BSD is compatible with GPL, you can distribute your BSD code together with GPL licenced code and YOUR code will be available under BOTH BSD and GPL, while the GPL part (which you didn't write) will remain under GPL only.

Ohh, so you NEED to be COMPATIBLE with the GPL... Stop this rhetoric shit; it is clear the implications of using GPL in your project. I would like to license my code WITH WHATEVER F***NG LICENSE I WANT. That is what I said (my code with my ARBITRARY license).

Don't judge others by yourself (and given how clueless you seem to be even in BSD matters you would be doing the world a disservice). That said, one reason the GPL is so popular with developers is because if someone makes changes/additions to their GPL licenced code and distributes those changes, they (original authors) have the right to the source code of those changes/additions which they can then use to enhance their version or simply continue to work from this enhanced version.

Ok, Mr. BSD Expert... So now you are telling me that the average user cares about source code, licenses, etc? Are you high? Come on... NOBODY CARES about this. Worse: NOBODY IS AWARE of this. I would like to ask random people on the street if they give a f**k about the license their computer programs are released under.

This creates a nice tit for tat exchange which also means that if someone forks a project, the original author can merge any worthwhile changes back to the original project, or he can join the fork because it's better. All this is possible since the source code of all derivatives stay OPEN, as per the GPL conditions.

With the BSD licence there are no such guarantees, and proprietary forks of BSD code happens all the time, just look at FreeBSD, we have OSX, iOS, JunOS, etc, and these forks doen't release near all changes back to the original project, certainly nothing which they percieve would be a competitive advantage. This is great for them, but bad for the original project which loses out on many enhancements which stays proprietary, contrast that with Linux under the GPL, where all companies are legally bound to submit any modifications, which has led to them pouring resources into collaboratively developing Linux and instead compete in other areas (typically services).

I am aware of all this. The only thing I have to say against the GPL is when they use the word 'freedom', it is just that; I acknowledge its importance, and value it.

Bullshit, the Linux project is the largest open source collaborative project in the world and ~90% of the code comes from corporations.

Go ask Mr. Stallman why he created GNU and the GPL. He thinks closed-source programs is the devil. And closed source only makes sense in corporations, where you need to protect whatever gives you an advantage over the rest.

It exists to make sure that END USERS have the right to the source code, modifying, running and copying the code, as it happens, developers are also end users. If it gives the middle finger to anything it is to proprietary projects.

If you don't work with computers, you don't care about source code or licenses. In fact, even if you work with computers chances are you don't give a shit about source code or licenses (unless you are working on a product, or program as a hobby). So, I can't understand all this "end user's rights" thing...

[dee.]

Anyone still trying to reason with this guy? It's like half of his posts aren't even halfway coherent...

I always love trolls who have more enthusiasm for debating than they have brains (or facts, or knowledge)... this guy doesn't even know how either license works, yet he's adamant that one is better than the other, simply because of blind fanboyism... great.

They can't, for example, close their source code.

That's a bad thing? Whatever.

Besides, it's false, the author of the code can close their code, no matter what license it's previously released, GPL or whatever. Again, you show an amazing lack of understanding how licenses even work...

[Cthulhux]

I would like to ask random people on the street if they give a f**k about the license their computer programs are released under.

Actually, that's not quite true. They do care if it's "free stuff *drool*" or not.