4 ms·

BSDs are not distributions. They are complete operating systems. They don't pick software packages, they develop almost all necessary software themselves (notab

by 4ad 13y ago

BSDs are not distributions. They are complete operating systems. They don't pick software packages, they develop almost all necessary software themselves (notable exceptions include gcc which the BSDs are trying to get rid of). BSDs are pragmatic in that they don't restrict their users in their usage of the provided code. That's how Cisco's IOS and Juniper's Junos can exist. The BSD ports contain many GPL software and non-GPL software (including closed source graphics drivers) that you can install on your own. They are not part of the base operating system.

belorn 13y ago
Some believe that permissive licenses are good because it do not restrict their users. Some believe that copyleft licenses are good because it do not restrict users of derivate version. Both are views, rather than practical actions. They are just thoughts about the promised land that licenses might give. The parent post talked about porting hardware drivers from Linux to BSD kernel. The BSD project decide against it, citing the license as reasons. As a result, BSD users goes without because the drivers are not of the right license. Pragmatism: Based on practical uses and successes rather than in terms of believing. Idealism: Mentally constructed ideas on how things ought to be best. Its priorities what it believes over practical gain. Deciding against practical gain because of an mentally constructed idea is Idealism over Pragmatism.
- 4ad 13y ago
  Porting a GPL driver to BSD helps only a few people (those who have the particular hardware) to the detriment of every contributor and every consumer of the code (like Cisco, Juniper and Apple).
  - belorn 13y ago
    How is that to the detriment of every contributor? They can simply opt out of using that driver. Are you implying that Cisco, Juniper and Apple don't have the expertise to exclude drivers that they don't want? You are trying to decide for those "few" people that they are better off without working drivers. Maybe some people do like having working graphic cards or working sound. It takes a quite fundamental approach to ignore practical use over idealism present in a license text. Not that this discussion matter much... FreeBSD has a linux compatibility layer, which mean they can often run said GPL drivers through its port system. Its only with the base system that useful drivers get thrown out with the bath water in favor of license purity.
    - 4ad 13y ago
      > How is that to the detriment of every contributor? They can simply opt out of using that driver. No, it doesn't work like that. You can't make driver X in the kernel GPL without making the whole kernel code GPL. > You are trying to decide for those "few" people that they are better off without working drivers. Maybe some people do like having working graphic cards or working sound. Aside from the fact that sound works better in FreeBSD compared to Linux (because of OSS4) and that graphics is at least on par with Linux (or better; the proprietary FreeBSD driver continues to work without recompiling the kernel shim every time the kernel is updated), you are completely missing the point. Some guy who complains on the Internet that FreeBSD doesn't work on his laptop is of no value to FreeBSD. Valuable users are those who contribute code, those who run large installations, and those who use the code to build their products. These always take priority and every decision happens with them in mind, not random dudes on the Internet. You're complaining about sound and graphics? I'm having a hard time believing this is a serious discussion, why not complain about the lack of sound and graphics on a PIC32 microcontroller. > FreeBSD has a linux compatibility layer, which mean they can often run said GPL drivers through its port system. No, this is impossible. Linuxemu is a compatibility layer for Linux user-mode binaries. It emulates the Linux system call interface. It cannot be used with Linux drivers. As mentioned above, the driver model is very different between different operating systems.
      - belorn 13y ago
        > You can't make driver X in the kernel GPL without making the whole kernel code GPL. That is factually wrong. You are perfectly fine in keeping the rest of the kernel under BSD. GPL only prevents added restrictions from being added to the GPL code itself, or the combined work. If users downstream remove said code, then it would not be a combined work anymore. See: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4854519/gpl-component-in-bsd-project http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4854519/gpl-component-in-... Or this almost 2 year old answer on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4359524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4359524 > Linuxemu is a compatibility layer for Linux user-mode binaries. It emulates the Linux system call interface. It cannot be used with Linux drivers. Quoting Luigi Rizzo: I decided to start working on an emulation layer that would let us recompile the linux source code on FreeBSD, and provide a sufficiently complete emulation of the kernel APIs so that device drivers (or at least certain classes) could be used without modifications to their source code. -> http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/freebsd/linux_bsd_kld.html http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/freebsd/linux_bsd_kld.html

by 4ad 13y ago

belorn 13y ago

Some believe that permissive licenses are good because it do not restrict their users. Some believe that copyleft licenses are good because it do not restrict users of derivate version. Both are views, rather than practical actions. They are just thoughts about the promised land that licenses might give. The parent post talked about porting hardware drivers from Linux to BSD kernel. The BSD project decide against it, citing the license as reasons. As a result, BSD users goes without because the drivers are not of the right license. Pragmatism: Based on practical uses and successes rather than in terms of believing. Idealism: Mentally constructed ideas on how things ought to be best. Its priorities what it believes over practical gain. Deciding against practical gain because of an mentally constructed idea is Idealism over Pragmatism.

4ad 13y ago
Porting a GPL driver to BSD helps only a few people (those who have the particular hardware) to the detriment of every contributor and every consumer of the code (like Cisco, Juniper and Apple).
- belorn 13y ago
  How is that to the detriment of every contributor? They can simply opt out of using that driver. Are you implying that Cisco, Juniper and Apple don't have the expertise to exclude drivers that they don't want? You are trying to decide for those "few" people that they are better off without working drivers. Maybe some people do like having working graphic cards or working sound. It takes a quite fundamental approach to ignore practical use over idealism present in a license text. Not that this discussion matter much... FreeBSD has a linux compatibility layer, which mean they can often run said GPL drivers through its port system. Its only with the base system that useful drivers get thrown out with the bath water in favor of license purity.
  - 4ad 13y ago
    > How is that to the detriment of every contributor? They can simply opt out of using that driver. No, it doesn't work like that. You can't make driver X in the kernel GPL without making the whole kernel code GPL. > You are trying to decide for those "few" people that they are better off without working drivers. Maybe some people do like having working graphic cards or working sound. Aside from the fact that sound works better in FreeBSD compared to Linux (because of OSS4) and that graphics is at least on par with Linux (or better; the proprietary FreeBSD driver continues to work without recompiling the kernel shim every time the kernel is updated), you are completely missing the point. Some guy who complains on the Internet that FreeBSD doesn't work on his laptop is of no value to FreeBSD. Valuable users are those who contribute code, those who run large installations, and those who use the code to build their products. These always take priority and every decision happens with them in mind, not random dudes on the Internet. You're complaining about sound and graphics? I'm having a hard time believing this is a serious discussion, why not complain about the lack of sound and graphics on a PIC32 microcontroller. > FreeBSD has a linux compatibility layer, which mean they can often run said GPL drivers through its port system. No, this is impossible. Linuxemu is a compatibility layer for Linux user-mode binaries. It emulates the Linux system call interface. It cannot be used with Linux drivers. As mentioned above, the driver model is very different between different operating systems.
    - belorn 13y ago
      > You can't make driver X in the kernel GPL without making the whole kernel code GPL. That is factually wrong. You are perfectly fine in keeping the rest of the kernel under BSD. GPL only prevents added restrictions from being added to the GPL code itself, or the combined work. If users downstream remove said code, then it would not be a combined work anymore. See: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4854519/gpl-component-in-bsd-project http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4854519/gpl-component-in-... Or this almost 2 year old answer on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4359524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4359524 > Linuxemu is a compatibility layer for Linux user-mode binaries. It emulates the Linux system call interface. It cannot be used with Linux drivers. Quoting Luigi Rizzo: I decided to start working on an emulation layer that would let us recompile the linux source code on FreeBSD, and provide a sufficiently complete emulation of the kernel APIs so that device drivers (or at least certain classes) could be used without modifications to their source code. -> http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/freebsd/linux_bsd_kld.html http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/freebsd/linux_bsd_kld.html