Today we host an interview with Christophe de Dinechin, Software Architect in HP-UX (Software business unit, Infrastructure Solutions). Most of you already know HP-UX, the leading "traditional" UNIX today feature-wise (second only to Solaris in Unix market-share, mostly competing with AIX). With Christophe we discuss HP-UX's competition, the other... 5 OSes HP supports with its various products, the Itanium platform and more.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Well, I should point out that out of the small list of GNU software you provided only gcc, emacs, and bash do not have identical BSD versions. The entire BSD userspace, ps, top, tar, etc are all BSD licensed programs with no help from GNU.
If you need emacs, gcc and bash to make a system usable, then nearly no system including HP-UX can be considered usable without GNU. Sure, gcc is not needed, but emacs and bash have no non GNU versions. There are certainly alternatives, but the BSD systems come by default only with those alternatives anyways. The only thing the BSD systems rely on GNU for is gcc. It's very unfair to call them GNU systems as certainly gcc does not constitute 30% of the system.
Besides, the real reason people get upset when BSDs are linked with GNU is the differing philosophies. The GNU people are very much anti-corporate or anything non-free in the FSF sense. Many of the BSD developers are not out there to topple any corporation, but rather just to provide a good system. Also, many BSD users do not consider GNU software to be 'Free' in comparison with BSD based software.
I suspect that's where most of the tension is coming from.
Well, I should point out that out of the small list of GNU software you provided only gcc, emacs, and bash do not have identical BSD versions. The entire BSD userspace, ps, top, tar, etc are all BSD licensed programs with no help from GNU.
If you need emacs, gcc and bash to make a system usable, then nearly no system including HP-UX can be considered usable without GNU. Sure, gcc is not needed, but emacs and bash have no non GNU versions. There are certainly alternatives, but the BSD systems come by default only with those alternatives anyways. The only thing the BSD systems rely on GNU for is gcc. It's very unfair to call them GNU systems as certainly gcc does not constitute 30% of the system.
Besides, the real reason people get upset when BSDs are linked with GNU is the differing philosophies. The GNU people are very much anti-corporate or anything non-free in the FSF sense. Many of the BSD developers are not out there to topple any corporation, but rather just to provide a good system. Also, many BSD users do not consider GNU software to be 'Free' in comparison with BSD based software.
I suspect that's where most of the tension is coming from.