3 ms·

They want to get rid of Stallmann's GNU concepts

canada_dry 7y ago
Ah... thx. Found this article by Stallman that gives some context to that: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject.en.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject.en.html
kpU8efre7r 7y ago
Good riddance
- djsumdog 7y ago
  Really? I would prefer more things were GPLv3/AGPLv3. Open source today is just a bunch of middleware, but few end products. People today use open source software to build closed source solutions. It's a far cry from what a lot of us envisioned back in the 90s. I wrote about this before: https://penguindreams.org/blog/the-philosophy-of-open-source-in-community-and-enterprise-software/ https://penguindreams.org/blog/the-philosophy-of-open-source...
tssva 7y ago
Now they just need to replace the kernel and almost all of the remaining userland.
pjmlp 7y ago
Which is always ironic, given that without Stallmann's GNU concepts, Linux would never have happened. And most likely, given the BSD state back then, it would mean we would just keep using either commercial UNIXes, or Windows would have won the UNIX wars. But lets get rid of Stallmann's GNU concepts.
- cat199 7y ago
  > given the BSD state back then you mean being persecuted by over-bearing commercial unices? (e.g. SVr4 and ATT)? lets not mis-confuse the issues to our personal ends - the argument is just as valid that without BSD UNIX, stallman would also not have a system to base a clone on.. GNU attempts to redefine the existing cultural status quo of open-source software dating from the dawn of computing to its own personal ends
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Sure they had a system, commercial UNIXes would been kept being used. GCC only got manpower when Sun changed the way UNIX SDK used to be given to customers. And who knows, maybe companies would have been more willing to dedicate manpower to HURD.
equdi 7y ago
That's quite a strong and completely unfounded accusation.
0815test 7y ago
I thought it was the *BSD folks who were known for insisting on that. Does, e.g. the NetBSD kernel build cleanly with clang?
- floatboth 7y ago
  Of course https://wiki.netbsd.org/tutorials/clang/ https://wiki.netbsd.org/tutorials/clang/ Though NetBSD is a bit behind on switching to the LLVM toolchain, here's a recent update https://blog.netbsd.org/tnf/entry/final_report_on_clang_lld https://blog.netbsd.org/tnf/entry/final_report_on_clang_lld Meanwhile FreeBSD (on amd64, i386, armv6/7, aarch64) has been buildable with clang since some point in 9.x (2012-13), comes with clang only since 10.0 (01.2014), and since 12.0 the bootstrap linker on amd64/i386/armv7 is LLD (which was the case on aarch64 from the beginning iirc)

Ah... thx. Found this article by Stallman that gives some context to that: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject.en.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject.en.html

kpU8efre7r 7y ago

Good riddance

djsumdog 7y ago
Really? I would prefer more things were GPLv3/AGPLv3. Open source today is just a bunch of middleware, but few end products. People today use open source software to build closed source solutions. It's a far cry from what a lot of us envisioned back in the 90s. I wrote about this before: https://penguindreams.org/blog/the-philosophy-of-open-source-in-community-and-enterprise-software/ https://penguindreams.org/blog/the-philosophy-of-open-source...

tssva 7y ago

Now they just need to replace the kernel and almost all of the remaining userland.

pjmlp 7y ago

Which is always ironic, given that without Stallmann's GNU concepts, Linux would never have happened. And most likely, given the BSD state back then, it would mean we would just keep using either commercial UNIXes, or Windows would have won the UNIX wars. But lets get rid of Stallmann's GNU concepts.

cat199 7y ago
> given the BSD state back then you mean being persecuted by over-bearing commercial unices? (e.g. SVr4 and ATT)? lets not mis-confuse the issues to our personal ends - the argument is just as valid that without BSD UNIX, stallman would also not have a system to base a clone on.. GNU attempts to redefine the existing cultural status quo of open-source software dating from the dawn of computing to its own personal ends
- pjmlp 7y ago
  Sure they had a system, commercial UNIXes would been kept being used. GCC only got manpower when Sun changed the way UNIX SDK used to be given to customers. And who knows, maybe companies would have been more willing to dedicate manpower to HURD.

equdi 7y ago

That's quite a strong and completely unfounded accusation.

0815test 7y ago

I thought it was the *BSD folks who were known for insisting on that. Does, e.g. the NetBSD kernel build cleanly with clang?

floatboth 7y ago
Of course https://wiki.netbsd.org/tutorials/clang/ https://wiki.netbsd.org/tutorials/clang/ Though NetBSD is a bit behind on switching to the LLVM toolchain, here's a recent update https://blog.netbsd.org/tnf/entry/final_report_on_clang_lld https://blog.netbsd.org/tnf/entry/final_report_on_clang_lld Meanwhile FreeBSD (on amd64, i386, armv6/7, aarch64) has been buildable with clang since some point in 9.x (2012-13), comes with clang only since 10.0 (01.2014), and since 12.0 the bootstrap linker on amd64/i386/armv7 is LLD (which was the case on aarch64 from the beginning iirc)