Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 12th Jan 2012 22:54 UTC
FreeBSD Some people already submitted this news last week, but it wasn't until today that it became official: the FreeBSD team has announced the release of FreeBSD version 9.0. As you may expect from the major version number change, this is releas eis packed with new stuff.
Thread beginning with comment 503054
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
FSF-like Ideology against GPL
by kragil on Thu 12th Jan 2012 23:22 UTC
kragil
Member since:
2006-01-04

BSDs hate the GPL. One big goal for FreeBSD 10 is to be GPL free (in base) http://wiki.freebsd.org/GPLinBase

I think that is a last resort effort for gaining any traction against linux, which won't work, but it is still nice to have a fully BSD(like) licensed base. Took them long enough.

More info:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/GPLinBase

Reply Score: -7

phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

No, it's not a "last resort effort to catch Linux". It's a pragmatic response to the GPLv3, which has prevented a lot of GPL'd software from being upgraded in the FreeBSD source tree.

The GPLv3 is the reason that FreeBSD is stuck with GCC 4.2 (the last GPLv2 release). Same with many other GPL'd apps in the source tree -- they can't be upgraded since the projects have migrated to GPLv3.

Hence, the big push recently to get non-GPL'd versions of these apps developed and imported.

Has absolutely nothing to do with "catching up to Linux".

Edited 2012-01-12 23:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 11

DOSguy Member since:
2009-07-27

I think that is a last resort effort for gaining any traction against linux, which won't work, but it is still nice to have a fully BSD(like) licensed base.


I don't think this has anything to do with gaining traction against Linux. Linux is and has been more popular than *BSD for years, and I think the BSD devs know and accept this. In fact, not having to compete with linux gives them the space and time to focus on pursuing goals of a more philosophical nature, like replacing all BSD incompatible licensed software in the base install.

edit: fixed typos

Edited 2012-01-12 23:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

You need to watch the LLVM video regarding FreeBSD - it has nothing to do with 'loving' or 'hating' anything but the reality that there are some companies that use FreeBSD which have a no GPL3 or GPL policy and thus it is one area that needs to be addressed.

http://llvm.org/devmtg/2011-11/

Reply Parent Score: 3

0brad0 Member since:
2007-05-05

You need to watch the LLVM video regarding FreeBSD - it has nothing to do with 'loving' or 'hating' anything but the reality that there are some companies that use FreeBSD which have a no GPL3 or GPL policy and thus it is one area that needs to be addressed.


The project needs an up to date and maintainable compiler/toolchain that meets the projects requirements and with GCC past 4.2.1/binutils past 2.17 that is no longer possible. It's a much bigger issue than just some companies having an issue with GPL'd code.

Reply Parent Score: -1

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

it has nothing to do with 'loving' or 'hating' anything

The hate I'm observing here lies within the GNU camp. And I must say, after being away from OSNews for a while... I'm shocked. Not that things were all sunshine and roses in the old days. But in this thread, at least, it seems even uglier than in the old days. This new crop of GNU zealots are absolutely hateful. But they don't even confront people publicly. They just sit in the shadows and silently mod thoughtful posts down.

We don't seem to have private messaging on OSNews any more. So the public forum will have to do. I note that you seem to have moved. Last we spoke, I believe you had just been through the earthquake. Hope all is well with you.

-Steve

Reply Parent Score: 3

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

No, its GPL3 only that people have an issue with. If it was just GPL, they wouldn't already be using FreeBSD as it has GPL V2 code already in it.

But thanks for the link that was pretty decent. Actually worth the time it took to watch it, which is pretty dang rare for web videos.

Reply Parent Score: 2

kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

So a few companies effectively decide what ends up in the FreeBSD "project".

Interesting.

Reply Parent Score: 0

mdoverkil Member since:
2005-09-30

First comment brings up the licenses, great. I can already see where this thread will be going. 70+ comments about licensing from non-developers and 5 comments about the actual release.

Reply Parent Score: 3

0brad0 Member since:
2007-05-05

First comment brings up the licenses, great. I can already see where this thread will be going.


Yes, the GPL zealots will start posting. That's a given.

Reply Parent Score: 0

bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Frankly I couldn't care less about licenses but maybe someone can answer what I DO care about which is the USERS. I sell boxes and laptops to Suzy the checkout girl and Brian the backhoe operator, you know, normal folks?

Well despite all the claims of "user friendly" Linux distros I have yet to have a single one pass my "is it safe?" test which simulates what my customer would go through with just 3 years of ownership. I take a distro from 3 years ago, install it, make sure ALL the hardware works, then using whatever GUI the system has update it to current. I have YET to have a Linux that didn't puke on its own drivers and end up with a broken mess that can ONLY be fixed with CLI that is above the skillset of my customers, thus making Linux useless.

So my question is thus: If I take say FreeBSD or PCBSD and give it my "is it safe test" what are the odds it will have 100% functionality? The great XP dieoff is underway and frankly i'm getting insanely overpowered XP boxes dirt cheap, we're talking 2.3GHz-3.6Ghz P4s with 512Mb to 2Gb of RAM and DVD burners, more than enough power for your average FB user. But unless I can find a free distro that is actually worth using I'm gonna have to can the whole lot, just strip them for parts, because a Win 7 HP license costs more than the box and I can't find a source of Win 7 Starter for system builders.

So if anybody can answer this for me I'd be grateful, we aren't talking funny hardware, the same Realtek sound and the big three IGPs everybody has had for ages, you know bog standard Intel and ATI chipsets, plain jane boring. you'd think with well known hardware like that Linux would work but nope, broken city. Is BSD any better? Is it worth me wasting the bandwidth or is it another CLI fest? Remember my customers are NOT geeks, no CLI allowed, it has to be easy peasy clicky clicky. Is BSD up to the challenge or should I not even bother?

Reply Parent Score: 1

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Look. I voted you up. But that doesn't mean I agree with you. I just don't think you should have been modded into oblivion.

Certainly, I've been pissed off enough by FSF arrogance in the past to seek to have an FSF-free home system. It's not easy. That small percentage of code needed on a Linux system which derives from FSF is hard to replace. And most people in the Linux world are pragmatic enough not to try just for spite's sake. The situation is somewhat better for the *BSDs. At least FSF doesn't have a strangle-hold on their libc.

It makes me feel better to have the option to jump ship completely, if I choose. The FSF is annoying... and sometimes downright scary. And Linux distros had better hustle to stay ahead. Someday, we might just get *too* complacent. (As opposed to the "short of the limit" level of complacency we currently maintain re: the other unix-like OSes.) And our hard-working competitors would have the well-deserved opening they've understandably been waiting for.

As a Linux guy, I'm quite happy for my *BSD counterparts.

-Steve

Reply Parent Score: 1

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

BSDs hate the GPL


No, it's just a different philosophy that isn't compatible with the GPL. While there certainly are people who do hate it for most it has nothing to do with hating.
It's like saying Linux hate non-GPL.

Edited 2012-01-13 04:52 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24


No, it's just a different philosophy that isn't compatible with the GPL. While there certainly are people who do hate it for most it has nothing to do with hating.
It's like saying Linux hate non-GPL.

Exactly, preferring something doesn't mean you have to dislike or hate something else. BSD and GPL cater to different preferences, sometimes those preferences change depending on the type of code in question.

Reply Parent Score: 2