lots of Linux and OSS topics lately

[groovin]

when i say 'lately' i mean in the last year or so. when i first jumped on anandtech all i ever saw was windows topics and a few macs. but now i see at leas t a few linux threads on the main page. lots of time its people new to linux giving it a test run.

great to see so many people giving linux a look. the number of topics in this forum is definitely indicative of OSSs growing momentum. i hope the attention linux and OSS in general are getting keeps up.

linux, mac, windows, *bsd, are all great and i think more OS's will only create more innovation.

 

[n0cmonkey]

IBM, HP, and similar companies are helping give Linux the attention it's getting. It's definitely a good thing. Seeing some of the press even OpenBSD has gotten lately has been interesting.

Right now school's back in session. Expect a bunch of threads for a while. And more "how do I get around the firewall" wieners in the networking forum. :roll:

 

[The Linuxator]

I think it's because Linux developers opened their eyes finally and realized that there are some ppl that want to be higly technical with their linux OS usage, and others don't for example Mr. Average I don't feel comfortable with windows give me an alternative Joe, so they started giving easiness of use more attention lately which I highly give them credit for 🙂 and hopefully more progress will be achieved on the goal of making Linux an average desktop user suitable OS .

 

[groovin]

what's been new on the openbsd side? I guess I'l b echecking out openbsd.org soemtime. reminds me, havent heard anything of dragonfly lately.

 

[n0cmonkey]

I guess it's been a couple of months since OpenBSD got some press... 3.8-beta is out though. 😀
Dragonfly is doing pretty well. Some interesting things going on there. I can't wait to try it out.
And as always, NetBSD is chugging along.

 

[calyco]

Linux yes, bsd not so much. Too bad since freebsd is such a fantastic OS, sometimes Im confused as to why bsd isnt more popular than linux. Everything is more simple and works better but thats just my personal opinion. One thing I really like about linux though that I find lacking from the bsds is the community support/help. One of the reasons I might give linux another shot, maybe gentoo.. FreeBSD's documentation however is unmatched in simplicity, just gets the job done.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: pack
Linux yes, bsd not so much. Too bad since freebsd is such a fantastic OS, sometimes Im confused as to why bsd isnt more popular than linux.

A lawsuit in ~92.

Everything is more simple and works better but thats just my personal opinion.

FreeBSD always seemed more complicated, and a bit broken.

One thing I really like about linux though that I find lacking from the bsds is the community support/help. One of the reasons I might give linux another shot, maybe gentoo..

What's wrong with the BSD community? Lurking on a number of OpenBSD lists I've seen them help plenty of people.

FreeBSD's documentation however is unmatched in simplicity, just gets the job done.

I don't know about unmatched, NetBSD and OpenBSD have some damned good documentation. I've used their documentation to help me out with just about every *nix I've used. Can't say the same for the FreeBSD documentation, it's a big jumble. 😛

 

[n0cmonkey]

Oh, one thing that might help the BSDs is if IBM, HP, Cisco, Microsoft, etc. gave back to the projects. What commercial product doesn't use OpenSSH as a basis? SSH.com, OpenSSH's only real competition. Why hasn't IBM, Cisco, HP, or any of the other companies using it donated anything? Ok, IBM donated a laptop after a long period of convincing, but that isn't a whole lot.

And yes, the Free license doesn't require anything like this (as a Free license shouldn't), but it'd be damned nice.

 

[calyco]

Really? Well Ive never had anything break on me so far in FreeBSD 😀 Almost all problems I had were user error and was solved with the handbook or a quick google search. And nothing wrong with the community, I meant bsdforums specifically. I like forums like AT where its more active just like the linux community. Btw n0cmonkey, would you recommend Debian or Gentoo for a desktop OS and setting up apache and samba later on? Actually more like apt vs. portage.. I really like apt but Gentoo seems to have a lot in common with BSD. Also I read that Gentoo could take days to install..? (wtf!)

 

[kamper]

I think it really is the license that has gotten linux so much more attention. I think once companies get over using the gpl themselves, they like the idea that competitors won't be able to extend their work without also releasing it. That and I think having the kernel seperate from everything else along with Linus' chaos model makes it easier to dive in and muck around with stuff on a large scale without worrying about having to fork.

About the op, I wonder how many records in the database relate to the question "Which distro should I use?". It is nice to see people showing interest and trying things out, but I wonder how many of them actually make any kind of a serious transition.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: pack
Really? Well Ive never had anything break on me so far in FreeBSD 😀 Almost all problems I had were user error and was solved with the handbook or a quick google search. And nothing wrong with the community, I meant bsdforums specifically. I like forums like AT where its more active just like the linux community. Btw n0cmonkey, would you recommend Debian or Gentoo for a desktop OS and setting up apache and samba later on? Actually more like apt vs. portage.. I really like apt but Gentoo seems to have a lot in common with BSD. Also I read that Gentoo could take days to install..? (wtf!)

I probably wouldn't use either for a desktop, OpenBSD works just fine for me.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: kamper
I think it really is the license that has gotten linux so much more attention. I think once companies get over using the gpl themselves, they like the idea that competitors won't be able to extend their work without also releasing it. That and I think having the kernel seperate from everything else along with Linus' chaos model makes it easier to dive in and muck around with stuff on a large scale without worrying about having to fork.

It seems like companies don't consult their lawyers and are confused by the GPL more than enbracing it.

 

[Nothinman]

I really like apt but Gentoo seems to have a lot in common with BSD. Also I read that Gentoo could take days to install..? (wtf!

Gentoo can take so long to install because if you use a stage1 install you compile everything from source and things like X, KDE, etc can take a very long time even on a new machine. Personally I wouldn't recommend Gentoo for any sort of use.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: kamper
I think it really is the license that has gotten linux so much more attention. I think once companies get over using the gpl themselves, they like the idea that competitors won't be able to extend their work without also releasing it. That and I think having the kernel seperate from everything else along with Linus' chaos model makes it easier to dive in and muck around with stuff on a large scale without worrying about having to fork.

It seems like companies don't consult their lawyers and are confused by the GPL more than enbracing it.

I'm sure companies like IBM or HP know what they're doing when it comes to licenses. Anyway, it doesn't take a lawyer to explain what happens when you contribute code back but they're still doing it.

I'm sure plenty of companies are using BSD. They just either don't find it as necessary or as easy to give back and so it gets much less press. Anyways, there's no sense in complaining about how things are; that's what the BSD developers chose when they picked their license.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: kamper
I think it really is the license that has gotten linux so much more attention. I think once companies get over using the gpl themselves, they like the idea that competitors won't be able to extend their work without also releasing it. That and I think having the kernel seperate from everything else along with Linus' chaos model makes it easier to dive in and muck around with stuff on a large scale without worrying about having to fork.

It seems like companies don't consult their lawyers and are confused by the GPL more than enbracing it.

I'm sure companies like IBM or HP know what they're doing when it comes to licenses. Anyway, it doesn't take a lawyer to explain what happens when you contribute code back but they're still doing it.

The gpl does require a lawyer. It's a mess. And there have been a number of companies that didn't read it well enough, and didn't contribute back to the community until someone got on them about it.

I'm sure plenty of companies are using BSD. They just either don't find it as necessary or as easy to give back and so it gets much less press. Anyways, there's no sense in complaining about how things are; that's what the BSD developers chose when they picked their license.

Yes, plenty of companies use BSD code: Microsoft, IBM, Cisco, Nokia, Juniper, HP, 3com, etc. Of course they don't have to give back, but you'd think they would since OpenSSH seems to be important to a number of them. If they wanted OpenSSH to succeed you'd think they would give a little bit towards the project. It only makes sense.

Of course, they probably don't care. After all, there is that GPLed alternat- oh, yeah.

These companies probably throw out more hardware in a year than we see in 2.

It's easy to give, OpenSSH even takes paypal. 😉

I'm not complaining, just making sure people know that when IBM helps out Linux, it isn't because they care about the community. 😉

 

[n0cmonkey]

OpenBSD changes for 3.8 (just a handfull from MANY):
[bul][*]stat(1)
[*]hostapd(8)
[*]Minimal wide character support was added.
[*]Support for the Intel 6300ESB ICH [*]watchdog timer (ichwdt(4)) was added.
[*]Can't forget ztsscale(8), the new Zaurus [*]touchscreen calibration tool.
[*]Initial Solborne port.
[*]ueagle(4), the driver for ADI Eagle chipset ADSL modems, was added.
[*]zaudio(4) lets me listen to mp3s or oggs on my Z.
[*]ipsecctl(8) is a new IPSEC flow manipulation tool.
[*]hppa64 is getting a bit more attention.
[*]sasyncd(8) keeps IPSEC syncronized for CARP setups.
[*]bioctl(8) is a raid management tool. If anyone wants to send me the appropriate hardware, I'll "test" this out. 😉
[*]ifconfig(8) can now change the MAC address on many NICs with the lladdr command.
[*]OpenCVS, ospfd(8), and bgpd(8) all get a bunch of improvements.
[*]And of course the new malloc(3) improvements (Theo's e-mail to misc@, kerneltrap.org, undeadly.org).[/bul]

DragonflyBSD just accepted pkgsrc as it's ports base! :beer:

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: kamper
I'm sure companies like IBM or HP know what they're doing when it comes to licenses. Anyway, it doesn't take a lawyer to explain what happens when you contribute code back but they're still doing it.

The gpl does require a lawyer. It's a mess. And there have been a number of companies that didn't read it well enough, and didn't contribute back to the community until someone got on them about it.

I'm not talking about deciding whether or not, or even how to contribute code back to a gpl'ed project. I'm talking about once you've decided to do so and have the proper legal approval in place. The developer or manager is sitting there, knowing that they plan to give source code back, thinking about whether they want it to be gpl or bsd.

The big problem with bsd is that it gives your competitor an advantage. They can take your code and do whatever with it without sharing back with you. Assuming each company does the same amount of work, the company that didn't contribute is twice as far ahead. Compare that to the gpl, where the competitor can improve your contributions, but must give them back to you, so you remain on equal footing. If your competitor chooses not to contribute then their r&d work will probably go to an alternative non-gpl project meaning they won't have as much use for your improvements.

I do think bsd is a nicer license, and certainly more mature in the human sense, but the gpl might just be what's necessary to encourage open source co-operation in the commercial world.

I'm sure plenty of companies are using BSD. They just either don't find it as necessary or as easy to give back and so it gets much less press. Anyways, there's no sense in complaining about how things are; that's what the BSD developers chose when they picked their license.

Yes, plenty of companies use BSD code: Microsoft, IBM, Cisco, Nokia, Juniper, HP, 3com, etc. Of course they don't have to give back, but you'd think they would since OpenSSH seems to be important to a number of them. If they wanted OpenSSH to succeed you'd think they would give a little bit towards the project. It only makes sense.

Seems to me that it's succeeding just fine on it's own 😛

Of course, they probably don't care. After all, there is that GPLed alternat- oh, yeah.

These companies probably throw out more hardware in a year than we see in 2.

It's easy to give, OpenSSH even takes paypal. 😉

I'm not complaining, just making sure people know that when IBM helps out Linux, it isn't because they care about the community. 😉

I agree. I don't see a company like IBM just dumping money/hardware on a project without some agenda like "You must complete such and such features that will be handy for us." The only way any serious contribution would get under way would be if they became active in the development process the way they are with linux and so many open source java projects. Then they would be forced to support their own developers and it would spill over to the rest of the project.

I think Theo enjoys not having any support for it. It gives him a chance to play self-righteous and to take shots at other projects and companies 😛

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: kamper
I'm not talking about deciding whether or not, or even how to contribute code back to a gpl'ed project. I'm talking about once you've decided to do so and have the proper legal approval in place. The developer or manager is sitting there, knowing that they plan to give source code back, thinking about whether they want it to be gpl or bsd.

The big problem with bsd is that it gives your competitor an advantage. They can take your code and do whatever with it without sharing back with you. Assuming each company does the same amount of work, the company that didn't contribute is twice as far ahead. Compare that to the gpl, where the competitor can improve your contributions, but must give them back to you, so you remain on equal footing. If your competitor chooses not to contribute then their r&d work will probably go to an alternative non-gpl project meaning they won't have as much use for your improvements.

I do think bsd is a nicer license, and certainly more mature in the human sense, but the gpl might just be what's necessary to encourage open source co-operation in the commercial world.

It doesn't give anyone an advantage, you do if you release your code.

Seems to me that it's succeeding just fine on it's own 😛

Yeah, but how much better could it be with some commercial big bucks?

I agree. I don't see a company like IBM just dumping money/hardware on a project without some agenda like "You must complete such and such features that will be handy for us." The only way any serious contribution would get under way would be if they became active in the development process the way they are with linux and so many open source java projects. Then they would be forced to support their own developers and it would spill over to the rest of the project.

I think Theo enjoys not having any support for it. It gives him a chance to play self-righteous and to take shots at other projects and companies 😛

They can contribute code, just like everyone else. IBM donating a few X40s, that probably cost them a couple of hundred each at most, wouldn't be tough. It's probably the smallest expense they'd make this year. Hell, some middle manager could probably take it out of the "hookers for clients" fund and not make a dent in the budget.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It doesn't give anyone an advantage, you do if you release your code.

Sure, but if you release under the gpl, you're not giving them the advantage that they get with bsd.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
DragonflyBSD just accepted pkgsrc as it's ports base! :beer:

And on another topic...

I thought df's original intent was to be FreeBSD but with a few fundamentally different performance ideas. I figured their ideal outcome was that the FreeBSD folks would see that their ideas really were better, that they would be incorporated back into Free and that would be the end of that.

Picking up a package manager from another project is an obvious indication that they mean to be their own autonomous project for good. Is that not getting into a situation where fragmentation starts to be a problem? Are their ideas so different that they require an entire new and seperate operating system?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: kamper

Are their ideas so different that they require an entire new and seperate operating system?

Yes.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It doesn't give anyone an advantage, you do if you release your code.

Sure, but if you release under the gpl, you're not giving them the advantage that they get with bsd.

You're still giving them free R&D work. They might not be able to sell the code, but they can definitely use it. 😉

EDIT: I think if a company is releasing code the GPL is better for them. If not, the BSD license is better.

I also think that any software funded with public money (ie: paid for by my uncle sam) should be public domain. Currently, it doesn't work that way. Although, quite a bit of code hs made it out of the gates under various F/OSS licenses.

 

[groovin]

Actually more like apt vs. portage.. I really like apt but Gentoo seems to have a lot in common with BSD. Also I read that Gentoo could take days to install..? (wtf!)

i use gentoo for many different things. i used freebsd and openbsd alot in college and a little bit after, and found gentoo's ports to have lots in common with ports. i used RH and slack too at that time, but i just liked gentoo better. you can search the gentoo forums to read more about why people like it so much... but ignore the --omg-optimized idiots. you run into them from time to time and they give gentoo users a bad name.

as for it taking days? well, maybe on a PII or something like that. if you do a stage1, then itll take even a newer system a day to get everything working (i heard of one guy getting gentoo stage1 setup on a quad opteron in under 2 hours... but who has that kinda hardware?). I just use stage3... got my amd64 working in a couple hours (thats with xorg and and firefox). it was a pretty lean system, but thats what i wanted. there are binary packages available in portage... i use openoffice-bin and mozilla-firefox-bin because theres really no point in compiling these (and wasting a day).

as for apt vs portage... man this has been flamed over and over again. i think both are awesome... apt is faster because it doesnt compile anything, but with portage you can trim some dependencies out... useful if youre someone like me that has a small (but fast) HD and wants to conserve space.

 

[drag]

I think that there has been so many topics about Linux/OSS/Free software stuff in the past year (at least in the OS forums) because that's only were the interesting stuff is happenning. Linux-related stuff is still new for most people and it's rapidly changing and evolving and everybody has equal access to all those changes irregardless to their income or job.

What else is there?

The biggest news out of Microsoft is that they are offering a beta to certain end-users/developers that joined their software club, whatever it's called. There were many more threads started about the fact that they decided to call it Vista rather then anything of technical merit. All the interesting peices were dropped out of that OS a while ago. For example doing the explorer/shell stuff all in "Managed Code", the 3 pillars: 'WinFS', 'Indigo', and 'Avalon' are gone. WinFS is in the dark corners lurking were it's been for the past 15 years or so under various names, and Avalon will probably come back in limited form for Windows XP anyways and that's indefinate.


And then there is Intel version of OS X floating around. That's kinda interesting but it's even more illegal to use then Vista beta 1. At least with Microsoft they make their beta OS somewhat aviable to developers.. with OS X it's only aviable to very special people with very special machines (basicly they are only special because Apple said they could have the privilage of paying for it for whatever reason). That leads to the only threads aviable are talking about how to pirate the stupid thing and that's against forum policy.

The only thing left over is 'how do I fix this' threads for Windows XP and Windows 2000 which are as common now as they've always been. Oh, that black viper thing was interesting for a while. Funny stuff.