Linked by David Adams on Mon 7th Mar 2011 17:55 UTC
FreeBSD "How long have you been using FreeBSD. Months? Years? Decades? And you love using it because of whatever reason but at the same time you're feeling a bit guilty to use it all for free without giving anything back? Well now you'll have the chance to change that. We at FreeBSD are always in need of new people who are willing to spare some of their time and effort into FreeBSD development."
Thread beginning with comment 465267
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: maybe its the license
by sakeniwefu on Tue 8th Mar 2011 13:48 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: maybe its the license"
sakeniwefu
Member since:
2008-02-26

I'd say it's less popular because it is a conservative, rather than cutting edge OS that isn't made to attract the masses and there is nothing wrong with that.


Personally I think lack of focus is FreeBSD's main problem. What was their target again?

A free OS? But they have ZFS and other suspiciously licensed stuff.
A server OS? But they only fully support desktop architectures.
A half proprietary desktop os with binary blobs, Linux emulation and Flash? But it doesn't work as well as Linux.
A conservative Unix? But they add many crazy bleeding edge extensions and Linux emulation layers that get dropped after a while.
A secure OS? A fast OS? A build-your-own OS?

They try to be everything for everyone and introduce many cool features and great code but IMHO they ultimately fall short.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[6]: maybe its the license
by dnebdal on Tue 8th Mar 2011 14:40 in reply to "RE[5]: maybe its the license"
dnebdal Member since:
2008-08-27

What non-desktop arch would you have them support? POWER7? Itanium? (Among amd64 and the arm ports, they seem well covered to me.)

Oh, and the linux compat has never been dropped? They updated it to 2.6.something a while ago, and they're thinking about moving to a newer linux distro as default in the ports system - it's been quietly working fine since it first got declared stable.

Reply Parent Score: 2

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

How is ZFS suspiciously licensed? Because it is GPL incompatible? There is nothing suspicious about it, the terms of the CDDL are clear.

As for your comment about architecture CENTOS is only for x86, I guess it must not be a server OS either. Red Hat dropped itanium in 6, the server world is going x86 in case you hadn't noticed.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: maybe its the license
by Oliver on Tue 8th Mar 2011 22:53 in reply to "RE[5]: maybe its the license"
Oliver Member since:
2006-07-15

>A free OS? But they have ZFS and other suspiciously licensed stuff.

Nonsense, the code is fine, the license too, it's just "incompatible" with the GPL. And guess what, nobody cares about fundamentalism.


Can you spell F.U.D.? Take a fish, your welcome.

Reply Parent Score: 2