4 ms·
Well, looking at the following things sort of gives it away: - brtfs vs zfs - cgroups vs jails - SystemTap vs dtrace - Systemd vs smf I get it, many of the
by StreamBright 5y ago
Well, looking at the following things sort of gives it away:
- brtfs vs zfs
- cgroups vs jails
- SystemTap vs dtrace
- Systemd vs smf
I get it, many of these were due to licensing issues. So they said[1]. Anyways, there are still some things to implement for linux. pf is my favourite (software) firewall. It would be great to see it ported to Linux.
1. https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/2094/are-cddl-and-gpl-really-incompatible/2106 https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/2094/are-cddl...
- shatteredgate 5y agoIn my experience, both Linux developers and BSD developers don't seem to care too much about porting things to the other's operating system. If you want to do things the Linux way you can use Linux, and if you want to do things the BSD way you can use BSD. That's seen as easier than trying to glue two incompatible things together.
- int_19h 5y agoBSD developers can't port things from Linux in a straightforward manner due to license issues. But that doesn't apply the other way around.
- shatteredgate 5y agoI don't see why. BSD and GPL are equally compatible, it doesn't matter which way you go. I can see why they wouldn't want a GPL component to be mandatory but it can be made an optional component for Linux compatibility which seems to be the way BSD would want it anyway.
- ajross 5y agoWon't, not can't. *BSDs shipped GPL components for decades before they decided to go for purity. It's a policy decision, not a incapability or mandate.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]