Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Feb 2007 14:41 UTC, submitted by Oliver
FreeBSD "Linux has a large amount of device drivers for hardware not supported on FreeBSD, especially USB devices. Not rarely, such drivers have been written based on information derived by protocol sniffing, reverse engineering and the like. This makes the code highly undocumented, and renders the porting effort extremely error prone. To help with this task, 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."
Thread beginning with comment 208211
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Miss-information
by Doc Pain on Fri 2nd Feb 2007 01:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Miss-information"
Doc Pain
Member since:

"BSD is not Free , because it gets closed and switched ..."

What does this mean?

BSD seems to be very free. From the copyright file:

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

Where's the problem here?

I don't know if you've had a scientific education. One of the first things you learn: Give the sources of your citations. You take some text (literally or not) from a book of some author and use it in your paper. Then you identify the respective passage as being quoted and name the book where you've taken it from. But you don't give the author any money for doing it.

With the BSDL, it seems to be similar. Correct me if I'm wrong. You have to include the license ("name the source") if you want to use source or binary stuff in your redistribution ("your paper"). You do not have to give your sourcecode back to the BSD team, but you *may*, if you wish to do so.

"I used to think differently , now I know better , my code with BSD become there code."

As far as I understood, BSD explicitly allows you to use BSD code as long as you mention it and include the license. What you implement using BSD does not belong to BSD in any concern. But you may contribute back. In my opinion many "hobby developers" (I may include myself here) are not sure if the things they implement are worth contributed back to the BSD project...

''"BSD works for well know features, that all has to be rocksolid. "

I don't get that one But I am sure I disagree with it anyway as to do with know features and rock solid with BSD as only example.''

I think you make discussion complicated. "I don't understand you but I disagree" is not a good basis.

From my experience, "rock solid" is correct, but I'm no casemodder, nor am I rich enough to buy up-to-date hardware to fiddle around with it. :-) So can't tell about BSD as a means of hardware experimentation.

"That don't help BSD at all if others always get the money."

Can't you imagine that there are people who are morally educated that well so they will contribute back to BSD which helped them to earn money? They exist, be sure.

Reply Parent Score: 2

v RE[4]: Miss-information
by Moulinneuf on Fri 2nd Feb 2007 11:32 in reply to "RE[3]: Miss-information"
RE[5]: Miss-information
by Doc Pain on Fri 2nd Feb 2007 12:05 in reply to "RE[4]: Miss-information"
Doc Pain Member since:

"That BSD's will allow closing of the code ( ultimate freedom remover ) and switching to another license ( ultimate license usage remover )."

Yes, it's possible and explicitely allowed by the BSDL. See the many projects using the BSDL and being free - they don't close code.

May I ask you if you're coming from a capitalistic oriented country? If not, maybe you're not understanding that exactly this freedom (of closing code) is neccessary to get market share? The term "market share" is always used to proof why one product is good (has a high market share) and another product is bad (has a low market share). Isn't this what capitalists want?

And about switching to other licenses: That's not true. Code that is BSDL will stay BSDL. If I use it, I have to include the BSDL's text in my documentation. I may release my software (the parts I've written myself) under the BSDL or under the GPL. I may also *not* release my source code. I may use BSDL code included into a commercial project as long as I follow the BSDL's instructions.

"List all the bad things for Open Source and Free Software and BSD's as it."

I think I don't understand you.

"No , because in a true scientific environment , you dont get locked out of scientific data or from the improvment or derivative made to/from it."

In science, in academia, you're usually locked in with some old fashioned MICROS~1 products. This goes for programs and for data.

I may tell you that everyone serious uses standardized and free data storage systems such as XML so there's no chance for getting locked in with the data created. To give you an example: I implemented a simple test analysis tool for the SCL-90-R checklist which runs on FreeBSD. Input data and result data are stored as a text file so I can use it anywhere I want. Anyone else can, too. But I don't see it's neccessary to release the program's source scl90r.c because it's dirty coded, it's in german only and anyone else may only work with it if he has bought the original test before in order to use the program legally (which costs some money). I don't want to bother anyone just because I'm to lazy to evaluate test by hand, just because the BSDL allows me to do so. :-)

"That's the problem , you claim to understand but you jump to other points and avoid point I make and take the discussion in another direction to avoid them directly. Your not honest in your discussion."

Maybe it seems to you to be this way. Maybe because english is my third foreign language and it surely is not your native language. It's hard to figure out what you want to tell exactly, so maybe I misunderstood you. I have to admit that I don't get your points because you don't elaborate at them in a way that it's clear to understand.

"BSD's is not ok for any situation."

What's okay then? And why is BSD used?

Reply Parent Score: 2