BSD code is used where?

[Broodjegehaktmetmayo]

Split from original thread.

Originally Posted by jggimi

• There are a multitude of hardware and softare vendors that sell products that have one of the BSDs embedded within them, or components of the BSDs within them, or their own products based on BSD. This includes companies you might have heard of, such as IBM, Microsoft, Hewlett Packard, and Apple.
• Many peripheral hardware equipment vendors, who produce drivers, are actively supporting efforts to use their hardware with one or more of the BSDs. Even the OpenBSD Project, which will never accept any closed source driver into the OS under any circumstance, has hardware vendors actively supporting the project with documentation and best effort consulting services, so that Project developers can produce functioning drivers for these companies' hardware products.
• Each of the major FOSS BSD Projects provides lists of companies engaged in commercial support and consulting services.

I don't mean to 'troll in' () but does anybody know of where to find some info about this? I mean, it is said everywhere that so many companies use BSD in their products / support BSD, but it's hard to find some examples (aside from the ever mentioned 'yahoo'). Make no mistake, I do believe in BSD and it doesn't make any difference to me who is or isn't using it, but it would be nice - just as a waste of time - who as a company also has smart people who recognize the value of BSD.

[jggimi]

Off the top of my pointy little head:

• Apple Mac OS X - FreeBSD userland on the Mach Kernel with a proprietary GUI. OS X also uses FreeBSD's port of OpenSSH from OpenBSD.
• Microsoft Windows - TCP/IP protocol stack imported from a BSD kernel, then Redmond-ized. I've seen postings mentioning both "NT" and "W2K" as the development point where the stack was imported into Windows. I would believe that all the various NT-based Windows platforms on the market today share that same basic stack. I don't know which particular BSD's kernel code was used as the initial port, nor do I particularly care.
• Sun Microsystems SunOS -- this -was- a commercial BSD for SPARC. Just sayin'. It was probably the most common commercial BSD installed on the planet, though there were others, including the general purpose BSD/OS for Intel x86.
• Every commercial Unix out there: AIX, HP/UX, Irix, Solaris, Digital Unix, OSF... you name it, has OpenSSH.
• Most Linux distributions have OpenSSH available. I won't say -every- Linux distribution, because I'm sure if you hunted among the hundreds of specialized distribs, you might find one that doesn't.
• Popular turnkey products with BSDs embedded in them include Juniper Networks and Barracuda Networks. There are many others, these are just two that come to mind.

[Oko]

Originally Posted by jggimi

Off the top of my pointy little head:

• Apple Mac OS X - FreeBSD userland on the Mach Kernel with a proprietary GUI. OS X also uses FreeBSD's port of OpenSSH from OpenBSD.
• Microsoft Windows - TCP/IP protocol stack imported from a BSD kernel, then Redmond-ized. I've seen postings mentioning both "NT" and "W2K" as the development point where the stack was imported into Windows. I would believe that all the various NT-based Windows platforms on the market today share that same basic stack. I don't know which particular BSD's kernel code was used as the initial port, nor do I particularly care.
• Sun Microsystems SunOS -- this -was- a commercial BSD for SPARC. Just sayin'. It was probably the most common commercial BSD installed on the planet, though there were others, including the general purpose BSD/OS for Intel x86.
• Every commercial Unix out there: AIX, HP/UX, Irix, Solaris, Digital Unix, OSF... you name it, has OpenSSH.
• Most Linux distributions have OpenSSH available. I won't say -every- Linux distribution, because I'm sure if you hunted among the hundreds of specialized distribs, you might find one that doesn't.
• Popular turnkey products with BSDs embedded in them include Juniper Networks and Barracuda Networks. There are many others, these are just two that come to mind.

Juno OS (Janiper operating system) for their $100 000 routers is essentially stock BSD 4.4 with extra drivers.
Cisco OS 80% of the code is FreeBSD price range of those devices is in hundreds of thousands.

[ocicat]

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

I don't mean to 'troll in' ()...

Your question is not trolling. Rather, it is hijacking.

Nevertheless, much of this thread is about laziness in searching. So here are a few more examples of BSD-based products:

• Network Appliance -- their new line of filers is based on a customized version of FreeBSD. Work was started by Spinnaker before being acquired by NetApp.
• IronPort Systems (acquired by Cisco) is best known for spam eradication had most of its product line based on a customized version of FreeBSD.
• F5 Systems' load balancers were originally based on a FreeBSD core.
• Force10 Networks bases much of their gigabit & 10G switches & routers on NetBSD.
• Ricoh Co., Ltd. has MIPS-based laser & multifunction printers operating on a NetBSD core.
• Savin also has a line of printers based on NetBSD.

And not to slight OpenBSD, the following article was mentioned on http://undeadly.org/ some time back:

http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1393496

However, to support your frustration, the liberal nature of the BSD License allows usage without disclosure. Companies don't have to advertise their products as being BSD-based.

[TerryP]

Since this thread no longer has much of anything to do with disk encryption, might I suggest a moderator split a few posts?


In regard to off jggimis pointy head:

While OS X contains plenty of FreeBSD and Mach code, there is also plenty of original Apple code in the kernel and other crap "Borrowed" for the unixy side, just look at the docs from Apple. It's not as FreeBSD as you might think. I believe FreeBSDs kernel also includes code from Mach and CMU.

Afaik the Windows networking stack was basically rewritten for NT6, so that bit no longer holds true either. Some programs included (at least in XP) also contain BSD code and terms, but it's a really small quantity. To add insult to injury, the Windows Sockets API actually meshes better with the NT programming environment then Berkeley sockets does with the unix programming environment (at the API level), and winsock is arguably better stuff then what they tried to emulate.

SunOS also grew plenty of System V stuff over the years, and eventually became more of a SVR4 base then early 4.x BSD based; although one can't quite have SVR4 without some BSD creeping in, either by borrowing or original implementations. Many of the commercial unixes you mentioned also barrow or implement certain BSD features, one way or the other.

[Carpetsmoker]

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.p...&id=1267447473

The file system used is the FreeBSD/386.

Actually the hard drive was not visible at all with the FreeBSD/286[sic] file system.

So this TV seems to use some FFS or UFS filesystem ... Maybe it is even running on BSD ... ?

[s0xxx]

Some of products based on, or got code borrowed from, NetBSD (also, products NetBSD runs on):

http://www.feyrer.de/NetBSD/bx/blosx...-tags=Products
http://www.feyrer.de/NetBSD/bx/blosx...-tags=embedded

(Yes, gumstix also )

[BSDfan666]

BSD code is apparently used quite frequently in Sony products, the Playstation 2 and the PSP incorporated portions of NetBSD's TCP/IP networking stack.

http://www.feyrer.de/NetBSD/bx/blosx...ont?-tags=sony

The Executable_and_Linkable_Format article indicates that the majority of todays popular game consoles use the ELF executable format.

While it's entirely possible that these companies have written support on their own, it is very likely that they incorporated the BSD licenced implementation instead.

The popularity of BSD in the embedded market is hard to fully realize, because the licence/copyright is working and nobody notices.. but if you look carefully at product documentation and licencing, you might see something familiar.