Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Nov 2008 15:47 UTC, submitted by umccullough
It seems that Haiku hacker Francois Revol (mmu_man) posted a few messages to a thread in MSI's forums asking to provide hardware with open specifications and/or (non-GPL) FOSS drivers such that alternative operating systems like Haiku and others could benefit and be supported as well. His messages were seemingly squelched by a forum moderator as "rubbish" while other, pro-Linux, postings seem to have remain untouched. Francois decided to respond with a public blog rant of his own opinions regarding the state of open source driver support and vendors' responsibility to their customers.
Thread beginning with comment 336416
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Why not use BSD's ...
by 0brad0 on Wed 5th Nov 2008 22:47
in reply to "RE[2]: Why not use BSD's ..."
Member since:2007-05-05
RE[4]: Why not use BSD's ...
by vermaden on Thu 6th Nov 2008 11:32
in reply to "RE[3]: Why not use BSD's ..."
Member since:2006-11-18
RE[4]: Why not use BSD's ...
by helf on Mon 10th Nov 2008 00:15
in reply to "RE[3]: Why not use BSD's ..."
Member since:2005-07-06
RE[3]: Why not use BSD's ...
by hamster on Thu 6th Nov 2008 16:59
in reply to "RE[2]: Why not use BSD's ..."
Member since:2006-10-06
About money :
http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/
Show your lying as usual ...
About code :
OS X vs FreeBSD ...
Show your lying as usual ...
About hardware :
Apple is a hardware company too ...
Show your lying as usual ...
About BSD'S :
BSD is not just FreeBSD'S ...
Show your lying as usual ...
Apple is not a Mom an Pop shop here ...
SL: Yeah, Apple's given stuff back. Audit support and a lot of other security-oriented work has gone on in collaboration, both in terms of Apple funding developers and also in sharing work. There are other examples -- I'm not real familiar with the situation, but I know that it's not a one-way street. Obviously we'd enjoy a better relationship with Apple, and would like them to be more involved with our code, but it's pretty hard to work with an open source project when you're shipping a product. If you're trying to ship a product, you have a timeline, you have deliverables... how are you going to depend on someone to deliver something on time if they don't report to you? I've been through this before. So melding the open source development work with a real product is a non-trivial challenge. I'd still like to see Apple be more forthcoming, though.
Source: http://www.thejemreport.com/content/view/304/
You mean back down , they fund , man and deliver code.
The inclusion problem is at the BSD ends ...
Howso? because they dont' believe in the churce of gnu?
1. There is no BSD licensed code. BSD is a protection clause.
Up to your usual bs i see... And as usual without anything to backup your bs.
It's funny that fsf did aprove the bsd licens if there is no such thing don't you think?
2. The BSD protection clause as no provision against license switching. The BSD protection clause as no provision for code being contributed back either.
there's no need for it to be a licens.
Somehow it grow an invisible requisite for it when people like you discuss it.
Me and everyone else outside your basement.
3. Most of the drivers created by GNU/linux company are dual created under hte GPL licensed and BSD protection clause.
Do provide backup. Just for once.
The one BSD use's everyday.
Why would they use a gpl licensed driver when they appently are dual licensed?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KDE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xfce
Etc ...
And you don't find bsd licensed code in any linux distroes? In more omportant areas then the wm..?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightenment_(window_manager)
No , but that one is gonna be really funny , your gonna claim code ownership and all the GCC owner wil jump on your illegal stealing.
I doubt even you know what your talking about.
That's your point isn't it , too bad it not backed by reality. BSD's and other liar and coward like you *hamster* might make money from the laws that punished Microsoft from barring others that still exist in reality ...
So when the team behind openssh includes code from a gpl licensed ssh from ex. redhat they don't have to think about the gpl?
See above , I named a few.
translation you cant name a single thing you have helped to pay for that goes into another project.
1. There is no BSD license it's a protection clause and the inteligent BSD are all starting switching away from it.
What BSD projects would that be?
2. There is no BSD code that exist today that as not received GPL code , direct funding from GPL company , direct GPL developer contribution and involvements , direct hardware loan from GPL company.
You made that claim a lot of times and each time you failed at provideing anything to back it up. Let's try again.
3. Last I looked , BSD are the one found guilty of stealing other's code , that's why there not default on most hardware that GNU/Linux finally support ( BSD used to be the support total king in the 70's and 80's ) , why it's not legally insurable too , if you got proof and a case why don't you go in court and prove you point. But we both know you don't ;-)
What code should they have stolen? And how do you steal code? And what BSD's are you talking about in the 70's and 80's?
You do , calling you a coward , liar , thief , traitor and moron is a fact , not name calling , sorry. I don't find pleasure in identifying you as such , I would prefer you would be legal , honorable , contributing to BSD instead of harming it. Using your real name too , but we both know you won't.
But do point to the place where i resort to your usual business with namecalling... Cant be to hard for you since i do it a lot according to you.
* Everyone.
So if i pay for support why shouldn't i get to use it without being restricted by the gpl?
- GNU/Linux user's buy GNU/Linxu hardware.
Aha...
- GNU/Linux distribution and service and OEM retail vendors ask for it.
And who would that be?
- Witch make OEM sale and make offers and order of hardware we want.
What oems are you talking about? Dell who wont even tell how many units they ship?
- ODM Company making GNU/Linux hardware mandatory due to it being the #1 OS worldwide.
It might be the #1 OS in your basement but in the real world it's not.
- Hardware device and part maker respond to the demand
of the market.
If they listen to demand why cant people just go out and buy any pice of hardware and expect it to work in the linux machine?
I know reality and hamster world are two things :
http://store.psystar.com/
It's rather telling that a company who's first product is Apple based , still don't make any BSD's offers ...
But it as a GNU/Linux offer ...
So they bought the hype and who cares? I for one didnt buy into the hype after trying different linux distroes i went else were where you get what you can expect.
RE[4]: Why not use BSD's ...
by Moulinneuf on Thu 6th Nov 2008 20:54
in reply to "RE[3]: Why not use BSD's ..."
Member since:2005-07-06
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-06
About money :
http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/
Show your lying as usual ...
About code :
OS X vs FreeBSD ...
Show your lying as usual ...
About hardware :
Apple is a hardware company too ...
Show your lying as usual ...
About BSD'S :
BSD is not just FreeBSD'S ...
Show your lying as usual ...
Apple is not a Mom an Pop shop here ...
You mean back down , they fund , man and deliver code.
The inclusion problem is at the BSD ends ...
[/q]"It's only compatible because the ... code went back to the bsd's aswell." [/q]
1. There is no BSD licensed code. BSD is a protection clause.
2. The BSD protection clause as no provision against license switching. The BSD protection clause as no provision for code being contributed back either.
Somehow it grow an invisible requisite for it when people like you discuss it.
3. Most of the drivers created by GNU/linux company are dual created under hte GPL licensed and BSD protection clause.
The one BSD use's everyday.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KDE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xfce
Etc ...
"Are you talking about . openbsd and netbsd. "
No , but that one is gonna be really funny , your gonna claim code ownership and all the GCC owner wil jump on your illegal stealing.
That's your point isn't it , too bad it not backed by reality. BSD's and other liar and coward like you *hamster* might make money from the laws that punished Microsoft from barring others that still exist in reality ...
See above , I named a few.
1. There is no BSD license it's a protection clause and the inteligent BSD are all starting switching away from it.
2. There is no BSD code that exist today that as not received GPL code , direct funding from GPL company , direct GPL developer contribution and involvements , direct hardware loan from GPL company.
3. Last I looked , BSD are the one found guilty of stealing other's code , that's why there not default on most hardware that GNU/Linux finally support ( BSD used to be the support total king in the 70's and 80's ) , why it's not legally insurable too , if you got proof and a case why don't you go in court and prove you point. But we both know you don't ;-)
You do , calling you a coward , liar , thief , traitor and moron is a fact , not name calling , sorry. I don't find pleasure in identifying you as such , I would prefer you would be legal , honorable , contributing to BSD instead of harming it. Using your real name too , but we both know you won't.
http://www.forbes.com/2005/06/16/linux-bsd-unix-cz_dl_0616theo.html
"And who's paying for the hardware support in linux?"
* Everyone.
- GNU/Linux user's buy GNU/Linxu hardware.
- GNU/Linux distribution and service and OEM retail vendors ask for it.
- Witch make OEM sale and make offers and order of hardware we want.
- ODM Company making GNU/Linux hardware mandatory due to it being the #1 OS worldwide.
- Hardware device and part maker respond to the demand
of the market.
http://www.linuxfoundation.org/publications/linuxkerneldevelopment....
I know reality and hamster world are two things :
http://store.psystar.com/
It's rather telling that a company who's first product is Apple based , still don't make any BSD's offers ...
But it as a GNU/Linux offer ...
Edited 2008-11-05 22:24 UTC