4 ms·

BSD Unix: Power to the people, from the code (2000)

82 points by vezzy-fnord 11y ago

TimSchumann 11y ago
Interesting read, thanks for posting. Brings a bit of relevant historical perspective given that I recently switched to OpenBSD for a project I'm working on.
sudioStudio64 11y ago
I'm a huge fan of BSD. This was a good read.
nickpsecurity 11y ago
Great read. I think the biggest takeaway is how they organize and run their operation. There's a tiny amount of high talent and dedication people that really control the process. They're open for contributions by whoever wants to try. They internally filter the wheat from the chaff to find those who contributions are truly useful. They give them extra power in both what ends up in the distro and helping the filtering/discovery process. The rest are still allowed to attempt whatever contributions they can. The model seems to hit an optimal point to bring in more good than bad. Might be worth copying in other projects. Supporting this is the other, highly-successful organizations that use a similar model. Far as Linux, there's always exceptions to the rule and lets not forget it depends on GNU work done differently. That hybrid, immensely popular development doesn't compare apples to apples with about anything. I treat it like its own category.
justincormack 11y ago
Kirk McKusick is still an important person in BSD. This story omits the role of NetBSD in opening up development in the BSDs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetBSD#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetBSD#History
- byuu 11y ago
  > And how many Linux distributions are there? asks McKusick, rolling his eyes. Fifteen, 20? How quaint ;) I would love to hear what he thinks about that statement and the state of distros today: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Linux_Distribution_Timeline.svg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Linux_Dis... =)
- brynet 11y ago
  In that sense, it also omits the part where OpenBSD truly opened development by enabling read access to the CVS repo (log/diff/annotate) to everyone. http://www.openbsd.org/papers/anoncvs-paper.pdf http://www.openbsd.org/papers/anoncvs-paper.pdf http://www.openbsd.org/papers/anoncvs-slides.pdf http://www.openbsd.org/papers/anoncvs-slides.pdf Before that, they could arbitrary cut off your access: http://www.theos.com/deraadt/coremail.html http://www.theos.com/deraadt/coremail.html https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NetBSD&type=revision&diff=665541892&oldid=656673576&diffonly=1 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NetBSD&type=revis...
yuhong 11y ago
It is funny how USL vs BSDi hurt BSD at first, but then SCO targeted Linux not BSD for a reason. Terry Lambert has a lot of posts on the backstory behind the settlement BTW (clue: you can thank Ray Noorda).
- cbd1984 11y ago
  In case you like obscure references, USL vs BSDi was tragedy, SCO vs Linux and Rationality was farce. It really is interesting how little the SCO cases actually amounted to.
  - stox 11y ago
    If it wasn't for USL vs BSDi, we probably wouldn't have Linux today, and BSD would be ruling the world.
    - cbd1984 11y ago
      Tragedy for BSD's dominance, I mean. I quite like Linux, personally, but people who prefer BSD probably view it as tragedy.
    - pjmlp 11y ago
      Who knows. Maybe BSD would just be yet another UNIX, and everyone would still be deploying Aix, HP-UX, Solaris, Tru64, DG/UX, among many other UNIX variants.
      - bahamat 11y ago
        We know. The culture in Unix was always sharing source and user collaboration. When AT&T finally tried to exert control there was a large movement within the community to go free of AT&T code. GNU and BSD were both a reaction to that. The rise of x86 and the availability of free Unix (in the form of BSD or GNU) was destined to destroy the proprietary Unix market. In 1991 neither BSD nor GNU had kernels booting on x86, leading Linus to eventually release Linux in August. Linux had the luxury of being the only readily available Unix-like kernel on x86 for several years. The USL v BSDi lawsuit slowed BSD efforts for nearly two years while Linux gained mindshare and features (specifically x86 features & drivers). Once the suit was settled out of court development took a long time to regain momentum. Net/2 was released in June of 1991 (before Linux!), so if the USL lawsuit hadn't happened, we might all be running that instead.
swills 11y ago
Great story, thanks for posting it. Really well written. The section on Gage at the end reminds me of All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace: https://vimeo.com/groups/96331/videos/80799353 https://vimeo.com/groups/96331/videos/80799353
PhantomGremlin 11y ago
Very perceptive observation by Bill Joy: The really nasty bugs are found by a couple of really smart people who just kill themselves. Most people looking at the code won’t see anything How many people looked at heartbleed and didn't see anything? How many people looked at goto fail; goto fail; and didn't see anything? And those were relatively simple. I wonder how many "really nasty" security bugs are still out there?
- sebcat 11y ago
  > Most people looking at the code won’t see anything Sadly, most people don't look at the code at all. They buy products marketed as making them safer, or trust central authority figures.

82 points by vezzy-fnord 11y ago

Interesting read, thanks for posting. Brings a bit of relevant historical perspective given that I recently switched to OpenBSD for a project I'm working on.

sudioStudio64 11y ago

I'm a huge fan of BSD. This was a good read.

nickpsecurity 11y ago

Great read. I think the biggest takeaway is how they organize and run their operation. There's a tiny amount of high talent and dedication people that really control the process. They're open for contributions by whoever wants to try. They internally filter the wheat from the chaff to find those who contributions are truly useful. They give them extra power in both what ends up in the distro and helping the filtering/discovery process. The rest are still allowed to attempt whatever contributions they can. The model seems to hit an optimal point to bring in more good than bad. Might be worth copying in other projects. Supporting this is the other, highly-successful organizations that use a similar model. Far as Linux, there's always exceptions to the rule and lets not forget it depends on GNU work done differently. That hybrid, immensely popular development doesn't compare apples to apples with about anything. I treat it like its own category.

justincormack 11y ago

Kirk McKusick is still an important person in BSD. This story omits the role of NetBSD in opening up development in the BSDs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetBSD#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetBSD#History

byuu 11y ago
> And how many Linux distributions are there? asks McKusick, rolling his eyes. Fifteen, 20? How quaint ;) I would love to hear what he thinks about that statement and the state of distros today: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Linux_Distribution_Timeline.svg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Linux_Dis... =)
brynet 11y ago
In that sense, it also omits the part where OpenBSD truly opened development by enabling read access to the CVS repo (log/diff/annotate) to everyone. http://www.openbsd.org/papers/anoncvs-paper.pdf http://www.openbsd.org/papers/anoncvs-paper.pdf http://www.openbsd.org/papers/anoncvs-slides.pdf http://www.openbsd.org/papers/anoncvs-slides.pdf Before that, they could arbitrary cut off your access: http://www.theos.com/deraadt/coremail.html http://www.theos.com/deraadt/coremail.html https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NetBSD&type=revision&diff=665541892&oldid=656673576&diffonly=1 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NetBSD&type=revis...

yuhong 11y ago

It is funny how USL vs BSDi hurt BSD at first, but then SCO targeted Linux not BSD for a reason. Terry Lambert has a lot of posts on the backstory behind the settlement BTW (clue: you can thank Ray Noorda).

cbd1984 11y ago
In case you like obscure references, USL vs BSDi was tragedy, SCO vs Linux and Rationality was farce. It really is interesting how little the SCO cases actually amounted to.
- stox 11y ago
  If it wasn't for USL vs BSDi, we probably wouldn't have Linux today, and BSD would be ruling the world.
  - cbd1984 11y ago
    Tragedy for BSD's dominance, I mean. I quite like Linux, personally, but people who prefer BSD probably view it as tragedy.
  - pjmlp 11y ago
    Who knows. Maybe BSD would just be yet another UNIX, and everyone would still be deploying Aix, HP-UX, Solaris, Tru64, DG/UX, among many other UNIX variants.
    - bahamat 11y ago
      We know. The culture in Unix was always sharing source and user collaboration. When AT&T finally tried to exert control there was a large movement within the community to go free of AT&T code. GNU and BSD were both a reaction to that. The rise of x86 and the availability of free Unix (in the form of BSD or GNU) was destined to destroy the proprietary Unix market. In 1991 neither BSD nor GNU had kernels booting on x86, leading Linus to eventually release Linux in August. Linux had the luxury of being the only readily available Unix-like kernel on x86 for several years. The USL v BSDi lawsuit slowed BSD efforts for nearly two years while Linux gained mindshare and features (specifically x86 features & drivers). Once the suit was settled out of court development took a long time to regain momentum. Net/2 was released in June of 1991 (before Linux!), so if the USL lawsuit hadn't happened, we might all be running that instead.

swills 11y ago

Great story, thanks for posting it. Really well written. The section on Gage at the end reminds me of All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace: https://vimeo.com/groups/96331/videos/80799353 https://vimeo.com/groups/96331/videos/80799353

PhantomGremlin 11y ago

Very perceptive observation by Bill Joy: The really nasty bugs are found by a couple of really smart people who just kill themselves. Most people looking at the code won’t see anything How many people looked at heartbleed and didn't see anything? How many people looked at goto fail; goto fail; and didn't see anything? And those were relatively simple. I wonder how many "really nasty" security bugs are still out there?

sebcat 11y ago
> Most people looking at the code won’t see anything Sadly, most people don't look at the code at all. They buy products marketed as making them safer, or trust central authority figures.