DaemonForums  

Go Back   DaemonForums > Miscellaneous > Off-Topic

Off-Topic Everything else.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   (View Single Post)  
Old 3rd September 2009
vermaden's Avatar
vermaden vermaden is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: pl_PL.lodz
Posts: 1,052
Thanked 118 Times in 93 Posts
Thumbs down The Failure of the GPL

A great article by David Chisnall why GPL sucks.
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1390172

Interesting quote from that article:
Quote:
Even the Free Software Foundation can't manage to get it right.
Version 3 of the LGPL, for example, is incompatible with version
2 of the GPL.
This has caused a problem recently for a few GNU
library projects that wanted to move to LGPLv3 but were used
by other projects that were GPLv2-only.

The official stance is that projects shouldn't be v2-only, they
should always be v2-or-later. I'll let you try to persuade Linux
to switch. Oh, and good luck with PDF readers, too; the only
open source PDF readers at the moment are based on xpdf,
which is GPLv2-only. The FSF is frantically trying to write a
new PDF library to get around this limitation, and licensing it
as GPLv3-or-later.
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind
"If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds

Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”.
vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd
Reply With Quote
  #2   (View Single Post)  
Old 3rd September 2009
TerryP's Avatar
TerryP TerryP is offline
Arp Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,547
Thanked 112 Times in 104 Posts
Default

The GPL in my opinion is likely the biggest brain fart in computer history.... since the Seattle Computer Products & Microsoft deal
__________________
My Journal

Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
Reply With Quote
  #3   (View Single Post)  
Old 5th September 2009
Business_woman's Avatar
Business_woman Business_woman is offline
lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 45
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Anyone actually read the 900000000000 page GPL doc ?
__________________
I like cookies...
Reply With Quote
  #4   (View Single Post)  
Old 5th September 2009
Beastie Beastie is offline
Daemonology student
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: /dev/earth0
Posts: 270
Thanked 23 Times in 23 Posts
Default

Nah, no one bothers reading long texts. It's so frustrating! People always fall asleep before the end, and when they wake up they've forgot where they were.

And computer users usually don't read the fabulous manuals.

And parliamentarians usually don't read the laws they pass.

And ... etc., etc., ...
__________________
May the source be with you!
Reply With Quote
  #5   (View Single Post)  
Old 5th September 2009
BSDfan666 BSDfan666 is offline
Real Name: N/A, this is the interweb.
Helpful companion
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,223
Thanked 193 Times in 184 Posts
Default

I will have not and will not read the entire text of the GPL licence, it is an excessive amount of useless verbiage.
Reply With Quote
  #6   (View Single Post)  
Old 5th September 2009
TerryP's Avatar
TerryP TerryP is offline
Arp Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,547
Thanked 112 Times in 104 Posts
Default

I've read the GPL and LGPL versions 2 at least half a dozen times.

GPLv3, I've only been able to stomach reading once or twice.... on the upside, it caused an increasing quantity of code in my home directory to fall under the beer-ware license, should they ever need distribution lol.
__________________
My Journal

Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
Reply With Quote
  #7   (View Single Post)  
Old 6th September 2009
Oko's Avatar
Oko Oko is offline
Fsck Surgeon
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kosovo, Serbia
Posts: 768
Thanked 36 Times in 32 Posts
Default

We can bitch all we want about GPL but the truth of the matter is that as long as there are no BSD binary utilities (linker and assembler) all BSDs can be wiped of the face of the earth in a split of a second if the GNU people want that. It is amazing that so many years after the release 4.4. BSD light nobody in BSD camp have not had a need to rewrite complete tool chain. Fully functional PCC would be a great first step but the only people who have publicly acknowledged the real Achilles tendon of BSDs (GNU Binutils) are AerieBSD developers.
Reply With Quote
  #8   (View Single Post)  
Old 6th September 2009
BSDfan666 BSDfan666 is offline
Real Name: N/A, this is the interweb.
Helpful companion
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,223
Thanked 193 Times in 184 Posts
Default

Given the skills and talent demonstrated by BSD developers, replacing the current GNU elements is not impossible.

Many projects have sparked up in the FreeBSD community related to replacing binutils with some BSD licenced ELF object manipulators.

The PCC project intends to replace GCC, altough this effort requires additional funding and ports to a few additional architectures.. but it's surely making impressive progress.

Recent commits to the OpenBSD tree related to mandoc(1) appears goal oriented as well, intended to replace another big GNU beast.. groff.

As lovely as AerieBSD sounds, it is simply a group of renegade OpenBSD developers whining about Theo de Raadt not being overly respectful of their emotional requirements.

The developers are clearly aware that newer releases of GCC/binutils are (..or may be) licenced under version 3 of the GPL.. but the one thing you need to remember is that BSD has existed long before the GNU project was a gleam in Stallman's eye.
Reply With Quote
  #9   (View Single Post)  
Old 6th September 2009
Beastie Beastie is offline
Daemonology student
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: /dev/earth0
Posts: 270
Thanked 23 Times in 23 Posts
Default

What about LLVM/clang?
__________________
May the source be with you!
Reply With Quote
Old 6th September 2009
Oko's Avatar
Oko Oko is offline
Fsck Surgeon
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kosovo, Serbia
Posts: 768
Thanked 36 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beastie View Post
What about LLVM/clang?
What about it? It is not even complete compiler. It uses certain parts of GCC and even if it was a complete compiler you still need binary tools. LLVM is just the easiest solution for i386 specific projects like FreeBSD to move from GCC which changed its license into GPLv3 for version 4.xxx and above which makes it unusable in any production environment. To my knowledge LLVM is useless on any non-Wintel hardware which might be good enough for FreeBSD and DragonFly but not for Net and OpenBSD.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
sendmail host name lookup failure ducu_00 General software and network 9 21st January 2009 02:42 AM
Make world failure disappearedng FreeBSD General 1 16th January 2009 12:04 PM
A failure in password security TerryP Off-Topic 3 25th September 2008 03:19 AM
Libpurple 2.4.2 config failure. KernelPanic FreeBSD Ports and Packages 3 23rd May 2008 06:19 PM
BitchX build failure mahoney FreeBSD Ports and Packages 1 8th May 2008 07:48 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright © 2007-2010, the authors
Daemon image copyright ©1988, Marshall Kirk McKusick