Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 19th Apr 2008 23:39 UTC, submitted by TheNerd
BeOS & Derivatives Every now and then, the Haiku mailing lists explode with emails about something called the distribution guidelines. The Haiku guys set up a set of guidelines with regards to use of the Haiku trademarks and logos; the "Haiku" name may not be used in the distribution's name, official trademarks and logos must be excluded, but the Haiku icons and artwork may be used. In addition to these cosmetic and trademark issues, the guidelines explain what is needed in order to receive the official "Haiku compatible" logo.
Thread beginning with comment 310569
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Distributions...
by Gunderwo on Sun 20th Apr 2008 17:17 UTC in reply to "Distributions..."
Gunderwo
Member since:
2006-01-03

I'm pretty sure that the BSD's and Solaris both use either Gnome/KDE/XFCE or some other graphical desktop. None of which are written by the BSD or Solaris communities.

So you're assertion that BSD's and Solaris use only software written for them is plain wrong. In this respect they are very similiar to Linux.

I know Haiku does write it's own software stack from the ground up IIRC, but grouping it in with BSD's and Solaris is wrong in this respect.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Distributions...
by BSDfan on Mon 21st Apr 2008 03:32 in reply to "RE: Distributions..."
BSDfan Member since:
2007-03-14

...no they don't, none of them include gnome/kde or even the toolkits (gtk/qt).

They're available in the ports/packages tree, but not distributed.

Only the "distributions", like PCBSD or DesktopBSD include such things, both are distributions - which I made a point of opposing.

Xorg is an "optional" bundle, MIT licenced. ;)

Please do some research in the future.

Edited 2008-04-21 03:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Distributions...
by Gunderwo on Mon 21st Apr 2008 04:56 in reply to "RE[2]: Distributions..."
Gunderwo Member since:
2006-01-03


Unlike "Linux", BSD, Solaris and Haiku have their own applications.. they're not a kernel that needs bundling with GNU crap.

Down with distributions, they're unnecessary and stupid.


This comment implies that you see the BSD's as complete software stacks that need not add any additional, non-BSD applications into a "Distribution".


Only the "distributions", like PCBSD or DesktopBSD include such things, both are distributions - which I made a point of opposing.


Yet in your very next quote you reference BSD distributions. So if you are aware of these BSD distributions why would you make a blanket statement about BSD not using distributions.

I'm not lacking any research, what I was saying is that for a BSD to be useful as a Desktop OS or distribution if you may. Is you will likely will end up adding additional non BSD licensed software to make it useful. This is the case whether it is a distribution or a base system added to through ports or packages or whatever.

I should mention also that we are now seeing Solaris based distributions too.

So your initial statement was along the lines of Linux bad, BSD, Solaris, Haiku good. Even though BSD's and Solaris's are packaged as distributions too.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Distributions...
by Gunderwo on Mon 21st Apr 2008 16:17 in reply to "RE[2]: Distributions..."
Gunderwo Member since:
2006-01-03


Xorg is an "optional" bundle, MIT licenced. ;)


Yet Xorg is installable from the FreeBSD installer and referenced in the FreeBSD handbook.

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/install-c...

You should read the title at the top of the page I linked to. It says "2.7.1 Select the Distribution Set".

I think maybe you should do a little more research.

Reply Parent Score: 1