Linked by fvillanustre on Fri 6th May 2011 22:19 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y When comparing the evolution in market share of Linux and OpenBSD, two operating systems that were born around the same time, a question comes to mind: why is there such a difference in market penetration? Linux, on one side of the spectrum, with a license that supposedly impairs commercial venues, has enticed companies and organizations to adopt and support it under varying commercial models, while the BSD derivatives (FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD), with a larger history and an allegedly more commercial friendly license haven't been as successful to gather a large installed base and widespread adoption.
Thread beginning with comment 472194
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Because....
by YALoki on Sat 7th May 2011 22:39 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Because...."
Member since:

It's not like they have to commit it if they don't want to, but I don't see a real reason for not participating at all. I mean yeah, I know the OpenBSD community and stances well enough to know that they don't want to do this, but they are able to review it and if there is any doubt they can throw it away. They are doing code audits anyway, so why not accept some?

Where do you get the idea that OpenBSD does not accept code from people outside the developers?

Several of the developers work for companies that use OpenBSD in their products and contribute code and, from the other side of the fence, there are people like me who have contributed code and had it accepted.

My case was one of the classic OpenBSD cases: "If you have an itch, scratch it". Or, in other words, "Shut up and hack!"

I wanted extra functionality in a key component in the OS so I wrote the added code and generated diffs and submitted them and they were accepted overnight and committed with Theo's OK.

I used to be an IBM Linux instructor and got tired of all the crap man pages, the lousy "How-to" meme and the "market share is a measure of quality" ethos.

It is puzzling to me to see people who couldn't read source code to save their lives carrying on about how good the GPL is and, whilst I was building secure firewalls for major players in the financial sector using OpenBSD, some Linux distros had hackable keys due to a slack coder in one well known organisation.

I see people in this discussion rubbishing OpenBSD's attitude to blobs. The same people who want code to comply with the GPL.

So, they are prepared to put up with junk code from hardware suppliers? No source for the blobs so that you can still have drivers when the OS updates and the OEMs don't?

They can live with their faulty RAID controllers that the maker can't fix but a really good coder could?

Strange people..

Reply Parent Score: 2