From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 0:32:28 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from freebsd.tesserae.com (freebsd.tesserae.com [209.157.194.69]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7C837C14C; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 00:32:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pwiley@cadabra.com) Received: by freebsd.tesserae.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 396EB462; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 00:32:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freebsd.tesserae.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3230B443; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 00:32:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 00:32:25 -0700 (PDT) From: "Preston S. Wiley" X-Sender: pwiley@freebsd.tesserae.com To: Brett Glass Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai , Narvi , Dann Lunsford , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows))) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709003340.049d0930@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Er, Jordan, *now* who's advocating being Quixotic? Such an effort > requires a team, as I can't exactly afford to quit putting food on the > table in order to do it alone. By arguing against the concept you are > discouraging people from joining that effort and are thus sabotaging it > and making it infeasible to undertake. Again, it appears that you are > trying to undermine my heretofore succesful fforts to promote the BSDs. > Why? Sounds to me like he is just disagreeing with you. Nothing wrong with that. We all have the right to our own opinions, even if it damages your argument. I wouldn't call having a differing opinion "sabotage." If you want to find a team of people to work on it, find people who actually agree with you. - Preston To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 0:37:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from bishopston.net (h91.reverse.bishopston.net [24.68.200.91]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8656237B58A; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 00:37:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jamie@bishopston.net) Received: (from jamie@localhost) by bishopston.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA29974; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 08:37:34 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from ) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 08:37:34 +0100 (BST) From: Jamie Jones Message-Id: <200007090737.IAA29974@bishopston.net> To: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, brett@lariat.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, dkelly@hiwaay.net Subject: Re: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows))) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000708104111.051b45a0@localhost> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 08:49 PM 7/7/2000, David Kelly wrote: >I will not *buy* software to run >under emulation. I would not buy the Linux version of Applixware. I >will not buy a Linux version of WP8. I will not buy a Linux version of >Opera. Considering that Opera will not be on my FreeBSD machines then >its extremely unlikely to be purchased for my Macintosh. Same here.... When and if vmware 2 goes native FreeBSD, I'll be buying it. I may get opera, too, but only if a native version is released. Jamie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 1: 2:14 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from shell.webmaster.com (ftp.webmaster.com [209.10.218.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB1B37B54F; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 01:02:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from whenever ([209.133.29.2]) by shell.webmaster.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-12345L500S10000V35) with SMTP id com; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 01:01:46 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Jamie Jones" , , , , Subject: RE: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows))) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 01:02:09 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <200007090737.IAA29974@bishopston.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > At 08:49 PM 7/7/2000, David Kelly wrote: > >I will not *buy* software to run > >under emulation. I would not buy the Linux version of Applixware. I > >will not buy a Linux version of WP8. I will not buy a Linux version of > >Opera. Considering that Opera will not be on my FreeBSD machines then > >its extremely unlikely to be purchased for my Macintosh. > Same here.... > When and if vmware 2 goes native FreeBSD, I'll be buying it. I may > get opera, too, but only if a native version is released. > > Jamie If the version under emulation were officially supported, why wouldn't you buy it? Is it purely for 'religious' reasons? DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 1:11: 8 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from shell.webmaster.com (ftp.webmaster.com [209.10.218.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 345C537B54F; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 01:11:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from whenever ([209.133.29.2]) by shell.webmaster.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-12345L500S10000V35) with SMTP id com; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 01:10:39 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Brett Glass" Cc: , Subject: RE: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 01:11:02 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709004740.049f9740@localhost> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > At 12:31 AM 7/9/2000, David Schwartz wrote: > > If it's in fact easier to officially support the Linux > version on FreeBSD, > >then that will provide a great stepping stone for getting to real FreeBSD > >support. Later, with a proven customer base and demonstrated interest, a > >business case can be made for improving FreeBSD support. > Unfortunately, David, they won't know which users are running FreeBSD, and > therefore will not be able to quantify that customer base. It is therefore > unlikely that their marketers will be able to make a case for the native > port. > > --Brett While I think that this could potentially happen, I don't think it's inevitable. A lot hinges on how vocal and visible the FreeBSD crowd is. Let's consider a case where it might matter. You have to make a few assumptions, or it doesn't even matter: 1) The company has a Linux build. (Otherwise, it doesn't matter whether or not FreeBSD has Linux emulation.) 2) They don't [yet] have a native FreeBSD build. (Otherwise, it doesn't matter whether or not FreeBSD has Linux emulation.) 3) The Linux build works on FreeBSD under emulation. (Otherwise, it doesn't matter whether or not FreeBSD has Linux emulation.) Now think about what happens given that these three things are true. Having the Linux version being used on FreeBSD can only increase the number of people talking about the product and FreeBSD. Now, two things are possible: 1) The non-native build works perfectly under FreeBSD. (In which case, except for OS bigotry, there is no reason to have a FreeBSD-native version.) 2) A native build would work significantly better. (In which case, the only reason for the company not to make a native build is if it doesn't justify the improvement (in which case, they _shouldn't_ make one just to make the FreeBSD crowd happy), or it does (in which case, if they're smart, they'll make one.) Having more ways to support FreeBSD only increases the chances that FreeBSD will be supported. And being OS bigots about how its supported doesn't help anyone. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 1:36:37 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5095437B696; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 01:36:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@wantadilla.lemis.com) Received: (from grog@localhost) by wantadilla.lemis.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA15771; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 18:06:13 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from grog) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 18:06:13 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: David Schwartz Cc: Brett Glass , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) Message-ID: <20000709180613.I14455@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709004740.049f9740@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i In-Reply-To: Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sunday, 9 July 2000 at 1:11:02 -0700, David Schwartz wrote: >> At 12:31 AM 7/9/2000, David Schwartz wrote: > >>> If it's in fact easier to officially support the Linux >>> version on FreeBSD, then that will provide a great stepping stone >>> for getting to real FreeBSD support. Later, with a proven customer >>> base and demonstrated interest, a business case can be made for >>> improving FreeBSD support. >> >> Unfortunately, David, they won't know which users are running FreeBSD, and >> therefore will not be able to quantify that customer base. It is therefore >> unlikely that their marketers will be able to make a case for the native >> port. >> >> --Brett > > While I think that this could potentially happen, I don't think it's > inevitable. A lot hinges on how vocal and visible the FreeBSD crowd is. > > Let's consider a case where it might matter. You have to make a few > assumptions, or it doesn't even matter: > > 1) The company has a Linux build. (Otherwise, it doesn't matter whether or > not FreeBSD has Linux emulation.) > > 2) They don't [yet] have a native FreeBSD build. (Otherwise, it doesn't > matter whether or not FreeBSD has Linux emulation.) > > 3) The Linux build works on FreeBSD under emulation. (Otherwise, it doesn't > matter whether or not FreeBSD has Linux emulation.) > > Now think about what happens given that these three things are true. Having > the Linux version being used on FreeBSD can only increase the number of > people talking about the product and FreeBSD. > > Now, two things are possible: > > 1) The non-native build works perfectly under FreeBSD. (In which case, > except for OS bigotry, there is no reason to have a FreeBSD-native version.) > > 2) A native build would work significantly better. (In which case, the only > reason for the company not to make a native build is if it doesn't justify > the improvement (in which case, they _shouldn't_ make one just to make the > FreeBSD crowd happy), or it does (in which case, if they're smart, they'll > make one.) *sigh* I had intended to keep out of this, but I must say I like your analysis. I'd like to add that we're not really talking about Linux vs. BSD here, we're talking about ABIs. At a time when even the commercial vendors are talking about adopting the Linux ABI, and I recently received a book on SUS2 from the OpenGroup which included an (uninstallable) copy of Deviant Linux, it seems remarkably head-in-the-sand to say that we should ignore this particular ABI because it was written for our "competitor". Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 11:30:12 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B67937B66B; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 11:30:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA12179; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 12:29:58 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709122318.04a05100@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 12:29:53 -0600 To: "David Schwartz" From: Brett Glass Subject: RE: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) Cc: , In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709004740.049f9740@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 02:11 AM 7/9/2000, David Schwartz wrote: > While I think that this could potentially happen, I don't think it's >inevitable. A lot hinges on how vocal and visible the FreeBSD crowd is. The FreeBSD crowd isn't nearly vocal enough! In fact, certain people seem to advocate AGAINST advocacy. > Let's consider a case where it might matter. You have to make a few >assumptions, or it doesn't even matter: > > 1) The company has a Linux build. (Otherwise, it doesn't matter whether or >not FreeBSD has Linux emulation.) > > 2) They don't [yet] have a native FreeBSD build. (Otherwise, it doesn't >matter whether or not FreeBSD has Linux emulation.) > > 3) The Linux build works on FreeBSD under emulation. (Otherwise, it doesn't >matter whether or not FreeBSD has Linux emulation.) > > Now think about what happens given that these three things are true. Having >the Linux version being used on FreeBSD can only increase the number of >people talking about the product and FreeBSD. And telling the company, "Hey, it runs under emulation!" Which encourages it not to do a native port. > Now, two things are possible: > > 1) The non-native build works perfectly under FreeBSD. (In which case, >except for OS bigotry, there is no reason to have a FreeBSD-native version.) Not so. Users still won't be supported on a platform other than the one for which the binary is targeted. Also, you are making the dangerous assumption that the emulation is perfect and will always be so. This is not wise. The next version might be Linux-specific. > 2) A native build would work significantly better. (In which case, the only >reason for the company not to make a native build is if it doesn't justify >the improvement (in which case, they _shouldn't_ make one just to make the >FreeBSD crowd happy), or it does (in which case, if they're smart, they'll >make one.) Unless FreeBSD users refuse to use the Linux build under emulation, there will be no reason to "make the FreeBSD crowd happy." This is why the "portable ABI" is such a powerful concept. It turns the tables; the most advantageous route for the programmer is to write to the FreeBSD ABI and API for BOTH platforms. And since the Portable ABI would be BSD-licensed, they could distribute it with their code -- or even link it in -- without risk of GPL contamination. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 11:37:36 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3915B37B688; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 11:37:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA12223; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 12:37:05 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709123023.04adf950@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 12:36:59 -0600 To: Greg Lehey , David Schwartz From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20000709180613.I14455@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709004740.049f9740@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 02:36 AM 7/9/2000, Greg Lehey wrote: >*sigh* I had intended to keep out of this, but I must say I like your >analysis. I'd like to add that we're not really talking about Linux >vs. BSD here, we're talking about ABIs. We're not just talking about ABIs, Greg, it's APIs too. And support. And compatibility. We need native code that is supported on our platform. We do not want to be stuck running code targeted at and tailored to ANOTHER plaform, with libraries which are part of another platform, under an emulation which could be broken in the future despite our best efforts, without vendor support. Nor should we support the pernicious political agenda which comes bundled with that other platform. One of the most imporant resons to support the BSDs is that they are not part of the FSF Empire. If BSD is only valuable with Linux emulation, it effectively becomes part of Stallman's agenda and empire. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 13:35:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from shell.webmaster.com (ftp.webmaster.com [209.10.218.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4207D37BEB7; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 13:35:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from whenever ([209.133.29.2]) by shell.webmaster.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-12345L500S10000V35) with SMTP id com; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 13:35:15 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Brett Glass" Cc: , Subject: RE: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 13:35:39 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709122318.04a05100@localhost> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > 1) The non-native build works perfectly under FreeBSD. > > (In which case, > > except for OS bigotry, there is no reason to have a > > FreeBSD-native version.) > Not so. Users still won't be supported on a platform other than > the one for which the binary is targeted. They may or may not be. If the company has any interest at all in supporting FreeBSD and it can do it as easily as just saying, "We support running our Linux build under FreeBSD", then they will do that. If they have no interest in supporting FreeBSD at all, then that's just that. You can't force their interest. > Also, you are making the dangerous assumption > that the emulation is perfect and will always be so. This is not > wise. The next version might be Linux-specific. Assuming they don't support FreeBSD at all. In which case, nobody will be any worse off than if it never worked under FreeBSD. As a slight plus, the company will have a whole bunch of people complaining that they don't work under FreeBSD any more. That might generate a response. > > 2) A native build would work significantly better. (In > > which case, the only > > reason for the company not to make a native build is if it > > doesn't justify > > the improvement (in which case, they _shouldn't_ make one just > > to make the > > FreeBSD crowd happy), or it does (in which case, if they're > > smart, they'll > > make one.) > Unless FreeBSD users refuse to use the Linux build under emulation, > there will be no reason to "make the FreeBSD crowd happy." That would be an incredibly irrational thing to do. I know that I personally ignore any such customer demands that don't have technical or business merit. And if some group of people is a constant source of such bigoted or religious requests, I tell them to go take a long walk off a short pier. As an example, I constantly get asked why we don't provide more support for things like COM and ODBC. There's no technical argument why we should use such things. They're mostly not platform-independent and mostly don't do anything useful. Do you think I listen to these people? Do you think they affect our technology plans? If I present someone with a solution that works and they just refuse to use it, well, tough shit for them. On the other hand, if they have an actual technical problem and it's in my power to solve it, I'll go out of my way to make things work. The finer and finer the hairs you try to split the less these points are likely to have any relevance in the real world. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 13:47:23 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from bishopston.net (h91.reverse.bishopston.net [24.68.200.91]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6F4837BF38; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 13:47:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jamie@bishopston.net) Received: (from jamie@localhost) by bishopston.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA79950; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 21:47:11 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from ) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 21:47:11 +0100 (BST) From: Jamie Jones Message-Id: <200007092047.VAA79950@bishopston.net> To: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, brett@lariat.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, davids@webmaster.com, dkelly@hiwaay.net, jamie@bishopston.net Subject: RE: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows))) In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG David Schwartz wrote: > If the version under emulation were officially supported, why wouldn't you > buy it? Is it purely for 'religious' reasons? I tend to think of running programs under the emulation API as unsupported. If it were officially supported, that would tip the scales a bit. I may be wrong, but I would trust a native version more than an emulated version, and would be much more likely to pay for something that installed "cleanly" without me having to install a whole load of Linux libraries etc. I prefer FreeBSD to Linux - that's why I'm here. I find it to be more stable, and more coherent (although I'll admit that it's been a few years since I played with Linux). I'd prefer not to install a Linux sub-system on my FreeBSD machine for the reasons I chose FreeBSD in the first place. I'd hope that there are no 'religious' reasons - if push came to shove I would run Linux programs under emulation - but I'd only feel totally confident if the program was native to my OS, especially if I'm forking out money for it. This isn't to knock the Linux emulation project - I have played with it, and it is a very good package - I'd just prefer to run things as nature intended :-) Cheers, Jamie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 13:57:18 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.hiwaay.net (fly.HiWAAY.net [208.147.154.56]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 793D037B622; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 13:56:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dkelly@hiwaay.net) Received: from nospam.hiwaay.net (tnt8-216-180-71-106.dialup.hiwaay.net [216.180.71.106]) by mail.hiwaay.net (8.11.0.Beta3/8.11.0.Beta3) with ESMTP id e69KusZ00514; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 15:56:54 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nospam.hiwaay.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA96769; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:01:09 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dkelly@nospam.hiwaay.net) Message-Id: <200007091901.OAA96769@nospam.hiwaay.net> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: "David Schwartz" Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: David Kelly Subject: Re: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows))) In-reply-to: Message from "David Schwartz" of "Sun, 09 Jul 2000 01:02:09 PDT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 14:01:09 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "David Schwartz" writes: > > > At 08:49 PM 7/7/2000, David Kelly wrote: > > > >I will not *buy* software to run > > >under emulation. I would not buy the Linux version of Applixware. I > > >will not buy a Linux version of WP8. I will not buy a Linux version of > > >Opera. Considering that Opera will not be on my FreeBSD machines then > > >its extremely unlikely to be purchased for my Macintosh. > > > Same here.... > > When and if vmware 2 goes native FreeBSD, I'll be buying it. I may > > get opera, too, but only if a native version is released. > > > > Jamie > > If the version under emulation were officially supported, why > wouldn't you buy it? Is it purely for 'religious' reasons? If the package was officially supported for FreeBSD, then I would consider it. If the vendor goes to the effort to test under FreeBSD and stand by their results then the Linux issue is no more than Yet Another Mandatory Runtime Library. I don't use FreeBSD because I enjoy BSOD-of-the-day, incompatible DLL's, incompatible-libc-version-of-the day, Linux-kernel-of-the-day, or any of the other variants of unreliable software symptoms that others seem to relish conquering in their daily use of computers. The sad thing is that many believe that situation is normal and natural. Just as many used to believe Detroit made excellent automobiles. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@hiwaay.net ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 13:57:40 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in (theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in [144.16.71.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CEEF537C1E8 for ; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 13:57:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in) Received: (qmail 893 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2000 20:57:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO theory3.physics.iisc.ernet.in) (qmailr@144.16.71.158) by theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in with SMTP; 9 Jul 2000 20:57:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 4330 invoked by uid 211); 9 Jul 2000 20:57:22 -0000 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 02:27:21 +0530 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Jamie Jones Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, brett@lariat.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, davids@webmaster.com, dkelly@hiwaay.net Subject: Emulation: eg WordPerfect (was Re: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows)))) Message-ID: <20000710022721.A4192@physics.iisc.ernet.in> References: <200007092047.VAA79950@bishopston.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <200007092047.VAA79950@bishopston.net>; from jamie@bishopston.net on Sun, Jul 09, 2000 at 09:47:11PM +0100 X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.0-test3 i686 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jamie Jones said on Jul 9, 2000 at 21:47:11: > > > If the version under emulation were officially supported, why wouldn't you > > buy it? Is it purely for 'religious' reasons? > > I tend to think of running programs under the emulation API as unsupported. > If it were officially supported, that would tip the scales a bit. I may be > wrong, but I would trust a native version more than an emulated version, and > would be much more likely to pay for something that installed "cleanly" > without me having to install a whole load of Linux libraries etc. This reminds me: Corel's WordPerfect 2000 for linux runs under wine, a project that hasn't even reached a "beta" stage of stability yet. It's got reasonably good reviews. There are apparently some performance and window-handling issues which seem to be wine-related, but nothing show-stopping, it seems, though I haven't tried it myself. And nobody is suggesting that Corel's level of support for the linux version will be less because it runs on wine, or that corporate support for linux is becoming undermined because of wine. So why worry about running linux binaries under FreeBSD, something which works an order of magnitude better than wine? If one can get companies to support that officially, that certainly looks like a big gain to me. Aiming to remove linux compatibility is not only unrealistic but extremely undesirable. Rahul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 14: 6:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from bishopston.net (h91.reverse.bishopston.net [24.68.200.91]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84D3237BF55; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:06:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jamie@bishopston.net) Received: (from jamie@localhost) by bishopston.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA97669; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 22:06:34 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from ) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 22:06:34 +0100 (BST) From: Jamie Jones Message-Id: <200007092106.WAA97669@bishopston.net> To: jamie@bishopston.net, rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in Subject: Re: Emulation: eg WordPerfect (was Re: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows)))) Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, brett@lariat.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, davids@webmaster.com, dkelly@hiwaay.net In-Reply-To: <20000710022721.A4192@physics.iisc.ernet.in> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > So why worry about running linux binaries under FreeBSD, something > which works an order of magnitude better than wine? If one can get > companies to support that officially, that certainly looks like a big > gain to me. Aiming to remove linux compatibility is not only > unrealistic but extremely undesirable. If the product is officially supported, then that is a big plus. If a product *is* supported under emulation completely, wouldn't it be easier for the company to release a FreeBSD version too, so that they don't end up supporting the emulator in the process ? :-) Anyway, although you aren't actually impying this, I'd just like to point out that I'm *not* in favour of removing the Linux emulation - my point is that I'd be more likely to part cash for a native version than the Linux version. Cheers, Jamie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 14:31: 7 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.osd.bsdi.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3483B37C1E8; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:31:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.osd.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA41639; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:31:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) To: Brett Glass Cc: "Thomas M. Sommers" , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 09 Jul 2000 00:33:21 MDT." <4.3.2.7.2.20000709002932.04980100@localhost> Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 14:31:24 -0700 Message-ID: <41625.963178284@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Again, you appear to be intentionally misconstruing or ignoring what > I've said in earlier messages. I'm starting to get annoyed with your continual references to earlier messages of yours in contexts which suggest that gems of wisdom or other easily understandable and logical points of yours lie buried in the archives and can be simply dropped in place of further logical argument on your part now. That's complete bovine exhaust and it won't fly here. Your past messages have constituted nothing more than a shabbily-woven skein of dubious logic, unsubstantiated claims and wild predictions masquerading as a voice of experience and I don't see how referring to them helps advance your claims in any way. Actually misconstruing or ignoring your previous points could, in fact, only aid in supporting your arguments given that there's no place to go but up from the position you're arguing from. You're like some guy in dark glasses swinging a white cane around and calling everyone else in the room blind. It's a very puzzling spectacle and I'm sure psychologists have a word for your condition which is hard to pronounce. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 14:41:30 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.osd.bsdi.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06B0A37B669; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:41:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.osd.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA56252; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:41:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) To: Brett Glass Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai , Narvi , Dann Lunsford , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows))) In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 09 Jul 2000 00:40:03 MDT." <4.3.2.7.2.20000709003340.049d0930@localhost> Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 14:41:24 -0700 Message-ID: <56235.963178884@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > No; it appears to be your crusade to quash some valuable insights. Nope, that can't be it. I don't see any valuable insights in this discussion. > My predictions have been accurate in the past and are being fulfilled > here as well. And my efforts to date in the BSD world have been > quite effective. Therefore, I daresay I have quite a bit of currency. > Why are you attempting to undermine it? You may daresay this, but I do not. I haven't seen any such accuracy demonstrated by your predictions and there's a certain hand gesture I cannot draw here which adequately sums up your efforts to date in the BSD world. So you put on a few panels and wrote an article or two - big, fat, hairy deal! I've done the same countless times and no longer even make any special note of it unless the article in question appears in the Wall Street Journal or Time Magazine or something. As to panels, anybody can put together a panel and even get some pretty good people on it. A panel is what you do when you and a bunch of other people don't feel like really working hard on a talk. ;-) Am I saying such work is valueless? Of course not, or I would not do it myself. I'm simply saying that you radically over-estimate the value of your currency if you think you can spend your $10 so profligately now on $100 arguments. > Er, Jordan, *now* who's advocating being Quixotic? Such an effort > requires a team, as I can't exactly afford to quit putting food on the > table in order to do it alone. By arguing against the concept you are > discouraging people from joining that effort and are thus sabotaging it I can only hope so - it's a damn stupid idea and I'll be happy to say that to anyone who asks. I'm somehow evil if I have the temerity to call a spade a spade? Get off your high horse, Brett, and stop assuming that every idea you have is somehow enobled to the point of automatic correctness just because it passed through your exalted brain on the way to your fingertips. I can only repeat the same advice again, and it's been good general advice to the population at large for as long as I can remember: If you really want to prove a point that badly, go do exactly as I said and write it yourself. I'm sure a bright boy like you can figure out some way to put food on the table and do something of a substantive technical nature at the same time since so many others in so many open source projects have done exactly that, time and again. You're just ducking and weaving all over the place so much when it comes to "put up or shut up" here that it's a wonder you're not motion-sick by now. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 15:28:12 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.osd.bsdi.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60DC637B9E6; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 15:28:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.osd.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA96188; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 15:28:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) To: Jamie Jones Cc: rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, brett@lariat.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, davids@webmaster.com, dkelly@hiwaay.net Subject: Re: Emulation: eg WordPerfect (was Re: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows)))) In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 09 Jul 2000 22:06:34 BST." <200007092106.WAA97669@bishopston.net> Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 15:28:03 -0700 Message-ID: <96185.963181683@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > If the product is officially supported, then that is a big plus. If a > product *is* supported under emulation completely, wouldn't it be easier > for the company to release a FreeBSD version too, so that they don't end > up supporting the emulator in the process ? :-) Sadly not, and for two important reasons: 1. The company is not really supporting the Linux compatability code, they're expecting us to do so and have communicated such requests to us in the past, so I'm not merely speculating about this. 2. If they do a FreeBSD version, and to any reasonable standard of "commercial correctness", they also have to deploy FreeBSD in the development, QA and support organizations so that the FreeBSD version can be developed, tested and, once shipping, supported in the field. I've had more than one ISV tell me, in response to my assertion that a native FreeBSD version would not be hard for them to do since FreeBSD is a pretty standard platform to port to and all that, that porting is the LEAST of their worries. It's having to add yet another platform to their development, testing and support structures that incurs the real expense in internal training and hours invested. I can really empathise with point #2, even though I hate it working against me, since I used to work for Lotus and I had to work on projects like porting AmiPro and NOTES to everything from SCO Open Deathtrap to AIX. Every time we had to add another Unix platform to our porting list, you could just hear the collective groans go up. It cost us uncountable weeks to cope with each new operating systems' hardware and installation requirements, even when they were total no-brainers (which they almost never were), since there's still a process to go through. Then we had to learn the quirks of each OS's development environment and the, um, unique places where things were installed. Then we could actually get to the point of copying our software over and typing that first "make", just to enjoy the flood of errors which resulted. At some stage, after many hours of sweat and caffeine absorption, we even got our first successful compile and link, after which the REAL work began in making sure everything actually worked, from the opening screen to the most obscure dialog box. Do you know how much work that is or how hard it is to convince someone in the project management group that they should even do such a thing? As Wolfman Jack used to say: "I been there, I know." - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 16:52:55 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from blackhelicopters.org (geburah.blackhelicopters.org [209.69.178.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAF2637B631 for ; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 16:52:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org) Received: (from mwlucas@localhost) by blackhelicopters.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA68433 for advocacy@freebsd.org; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 19:52:52 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mwlucas) From: Michael Lucas Message-Id: <200007092352.TAA68433@blackhelicopters.org> Subject: Re: Emulation To: advocacy@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 19:52:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Okay, I'm going to get all icky and dirty here, but I can't help but jump in: A big selling point I find in FreeBSD is the "we can run it" aspect. We provide SVR4 and IBCS2 ABIs in addition to the Linux and Wine ABIs. More than once, I've had a client who has a product dying on, say, a SCO box. By putting that same product on my laptop under the appropriate ABI and getting the office back in production, and then saying "Okay, let's find the *right* fix for the job," I pique their interest in FreeBSD. (I keep two NICs in that laptop for the same reason -- it makes a dandy emergency firewall.) Of the three times I've done this, twice we wound up with a FreeBSD machine running that software. A decent ABI with a solid back end can outperform the native platform. Occasionally, they've even bought different software because it would run on FreeBSD, simply because my stupid little $2K laptop outperformed their $10K Compaq server. The third time, they ripped UNIX out and put in NT. I sent videos of the results off to Clive Barker for inspiration. But that's another story. What this is leading to: I think it would hurt us if Linux had FreeBSD ABI compatability. Our "I don't care what it was compiled for, we can run it" flexibility is a strong, strong selling point. It's called the "can-do" attitude; that's what I look for in employees and operating systems alike. Anyway, I'll shut up now. We now return you to your regularly scheduled flamewar. ==ml PS: So, is anyone interested in *advocating* BSD on this list? I've gotten one person interested in a Southeast Michigan BSD group; it seems like the Lansing folks are hitting it off. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 19:17:23 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0446F37C37D; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 19:17:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id TAA22140; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 19:17:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 19:17:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: Brett Glass Cc: Ignacio Cristerna , Frank Pawlak , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows))) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000707102444.047ab100@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Brett Glass wrote: > Me too! Who out there who is willing to help mount an effort to > "invade" the Linux space by doing a FreeBSD ABI (application binary > interface) for Linux? I will! Together we can conquer the barbarians and retake the land of ISV which is rightfully ours! Just, uh, you go first, I'll cover you from behind in case they sneak up from the rear. Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 21: 8:47 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86E9337B697; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 21:08:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA15678; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 22:08:31 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709220353.04a82610@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 22:08:22 -0600 To: Kris Kennaway From: Brett Glass Subject: Conquering the Land of ISV (Was: No port of Opera?) Cc: Ignacio Cristerna , Frank Pawlak , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , chat@FreeBSD.org, advocacy@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000707102444.047ab100@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 08:17 PM 7/9/2000, Kris Kennaway wrote: >I will! Together we can conquer the barbarians and retake the land of ISV >which is rightfully ours! Just, uh, you go first, I'll cover you from >behind in case they sneak up from the rear. What is it that they say: You can recognize the pioneers, because they're the ones with the arrows in their backs? ;-) Seriously, I do seem to be getting shot in the back an awful lot in this forum. I have some replies to make, especially to some of the messages Jordan has written, but they'll have to wait until tomorrow. I have a deadline tonight. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 21:32:22 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from shell.webmaster.com (ftp.webmaster.com [209.10.218.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D24DB37B706; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 21:32:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from whenever ([209.133.29.2]) by shell.webmaster.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-12345L500S10000V35) with SMTP id com; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 21:31:51 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Jamie Jones" Cc: , Subject: RE: Emulation: eg WordPerfect (was Re: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows)))) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 21:32:14 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <200007092106.WAA97669@bishopston.net> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > So why worry about running linux binaries under FreeBSD, something > > which works an order of magnitude better than wine? If one can get > > companies to support that officially, that certainly looks like a big > > gain to me. Aiming to remove linux compatibility is not only > > unrealistic but extremely undesirable. > If the product is officially supported, then that is a big plus. If a > product *is* supported under emulation completely, wouldn't it be easier > for the company to release a FreeBSD version too, so that they don't end > up supporting the emulator in the process ? :-) I tend to agree. I would imagine that officially supporting a version that runs under emulation would tend to be used as a stopgap measure. It's just too unprofessional and likely to be difficult to maintain. > Anyway, although you aren't actually impying this, I'd just like to point > out that I'm *not* in favour of removing the Linux emulation - my point is > that I'd be more likely to part cash for a native version than the Linux > version. Fair enough. A person trying to sell me a version to run under emulation would have to convince me of the stability and reliability of more pieces. The last time I ported a major project that compiled under Linux to FreeBSD, the vast majority of the work was dealing with missing functions like 'nanosleep' and 'poll'. Now that those functions exist, it's hard for me to imagine what difficulties could be encountered porting a program that works under Linux to FreeBSD. Even if you used real Linux-isms like details about proc, kernel modules, or something like that, you'd have to have a way to do those things on other OSes. Odds are one of those methods would work with minimal fuss under FreeBSD. The only issues I see are those related to stocking another product, supporting another platform, compiling more builds, and so on. I don't think there are technical issues left. (Thus, on to Jordan's post): > 2. If they do a FreeBSD version, and to any reasonable standard of > "commercial correctness", they also have to deploy FreeBSD in > the development, QA and support organizations so that the FreeBSD > version can be developed, tested and, once shipping, supported in the > field. I've had more than one ISV tell me, in response to my > assertion that a native FreeBSD version would not be hard for them > to do since FreeBSD is a pretty standard platform to port to and > all that, that porting is the LEAST of their worries. It's having > to add yet another platform to their development, testing and > support structures that incurs the real expense in internal > training and hours invested. > - Jordan If that's the issue, then nothing that you can do to FreeBSD technically will make any difference. Emulator, no emulator, portable ABI, or not -- it's purely a matter of whether there's enough people who want to run FreeBSD to justify the expense. If that's the major problem, then the solution is popularity and noise. The company I work for currently maintains _three_ FreeBSD builds of our products, one for FreeBSD2, one for FreeBSD3, one one for FreeBSD4. We're about to drop the FreeBSD2 build because it stopped working. That means we have to build and test two or three more versions before each release. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 22: 7: 8 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from epsilon.lucida.qc.ca (epsilon.lucida.qc.ca [216.95.146.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D1DC337C4D1 for ; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 22:06:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from matt@ARPA.MAIL.NET) Received: (qmail 42074 invoked by uid 1000); 10 Jul 2000 05:06:59 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Jul 2000 05:06:59 -0000 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 01:06:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Matt Heckaman X-Sender: matt@epsilon.lucida.qc.ca To: Brett Glass Cc: chat@FreeBSD.org, advocacy@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Conquering the Land of ISV (Was: No port of Opera?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709220353.04a82610@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: localhost 1.6.2 0/1000/N Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Brett Glass wrote: [cc list trimmed] ... : Seriously, I do seem to be getting shot in the back an awful lot in : this forum. I have some replies to make, especially to some of the : messages Jordan has written, but they'll have to wait until tomorrow. : I have a deadline tonight. You can't be getting shot in the back in a debate that you're willfully taking part in. That goes for all of you. I like the emulator, it has solved nearly every one of my "damn I wish I could run X in FreeBSD" problems to date. Would I PAY for a product to run under emulation? Not on your life. Do I expect SUPPORT for a product under emulation? Nope. I do buy software native to FreeBSD though, (codeforge being a good example) and I would love a native port of xyz as much as anyone. Such is life. Its high time we deal with that reality AT THE MOMENT because right now there's not much we can do about it. Maybe when the whole attitude of "{Free,Net,Open}BSD, is that a variant of Linux?" changes, as well as developers getting very fed up with the inconsistencies that make their life a living nightmare, THEN we may get our wishes. I see both sides of your argument, and I've hesitated to get involved until now, but this has degraded far below what the real issues are. I would suggest to all involved that it may be best to wage war on the problem, not the personal feelings involved. Can we please end this god awful thread? : --Brett * Matt Heckaman - mailto:matt@lucida.qc.ca http://www.lucida.qc.ca/ * * GPG fingerprint - A9BC F3A8 278E 22F2 9BDA BFCF 74C3 2D31 C035 5390 * -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: http://www.lucida.qc.ca/pgp iD8DBQE5aVnydMMtMcA1U5ARAtNzAJ44A1NuDGYj7byGhmJez4IAz5zL+QCgg8Wr galqM1hwL4ZzPgtBau14cc0= =690X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 9 23: 3:58 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from inconnu.isu.edu (inconnu.isu.edu [134.50.8.55]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB66137B7D7; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 23:03:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from galt@inconnu.isu.edu) Received: from localhost (galt@localhost) by inconnu.isu.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA22225; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 00:03:53 -0600 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 00:03:53 -0600 (MDT) From: John Galt Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Conquering the Land of ISV (Was: No port of Opera?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709220353.04a82610@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Thanks for the advance notice, Brett: pico .procmailrc :0: * ^From: Brett Glass * /dev/null much better :) On Sun, 9 Jul 2000, Brett Glass wrote: > this forum. I have some replies to make, especially to some of the > messages Jordan has written, but they'll have to wait until tomorrow. > I have a deadline tonight. > > --Brett > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message > -- Sacred cows make the best burgers Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who!!! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Jul 10 7:25:40 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtp.smed.com (smtp.smed.com [12.20.51.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D71C37B700 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 07:25:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Joe.Warner@smed.com) Received: from smtpgate.shrmed.com (keymaster.smed.com [12.20.51.2]) by smtp.smed.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 755B31619C for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:24:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from iesa14.shrmed.com (iesa14.shrmed.com [10.1.99.114]) by smtpgate.shrmed.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA16960 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:24:51 -0400 From: Joe.Warner@smed.com Received: from Deimos.smed.com (unverified) by iesa14.shrmed.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:24:46 -0400 Received: by Deimos.smed.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.5 (863.2 5-20-1999)) id 85256918.004F1C4B ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:24:05 -0400 X-Lotus-FromDomain: SMS To: Greg Lehey Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org, magus@magus.users.xmission.com Message-Id: <85256918.004F1A18.00@Deimos.smed.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 08:25:31 -0600 Subject: Re: BSD v. Unix MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I don't remember where exactly, but I have seen FreeBSD referred to as > the "last true Unix." Is this a wholly accurate description? No. I don't think it's even partially accurate for any reasonable definition of "partially". Recall that it shares no code with AT&T UNIX up to and including the Seventh Edition. Greg, Please don't take this personally or view this as critisism but I recently purchased your book, "The Complete FreeBSD", and what an excellent book it is! 8^) After reading the preface, I was under the impression that FreeBSD is a raw UNIX system and has greater rights to call itself UNIX than OS's like Linux because it's not a UNIX clone. I will quote from the preface: "FreeBSD is a high-performance operating system derived from the Berkeley Software Distribution, or BSD, the version of UNIX developed at the University of California at Berkeley between 1975 and 1993. FreeBSD is not a UNIX clone. Historically and technically, it has greater rights than UNIX System V to be called UNIX Legally, it may not be called UNIX, since UNIX is now a registered trade mark of The Open Group. Can you expand on this? Am I missing the mark on this? Were you saying that FreeBSD can still be called UNIX but not the "last true UNIX"? Joe |--------+-----------------------> | | Greg Lehey | | | | | | | | | 07/08/00 | | | 02:19 AM | | | | |--------+-----------------------> >--------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: Anthony Chavez | | | | cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, (bcc: Joe | | Warner/SMS) | | Subject: Re: BSD v. Unix | >--------------------------------------------------------| On Saturday, 8 July 2000 at 2:12:31 -0600, Anthony Chavez wrote: > Fellow advocates: > > I don't remember where exactly, but I have seen FreeBSD referred to as > the "last true Unix." Is this a wholly accurate description? No. I don't think it's even partially accurate for any reasonable definition of "partially". Recall that it shares no code with AT&T UNIX up to and including the Seventh Edition. > Would it be correct to refer to *BSD in such a manner? No. In fact, we don't want to refer to "*BSD" at all: it sounds divisive. BSD without the '*' looks a lot better. As to "the last true UNIX": that way Holy Wars lie. I've most often heard it applied to the Seventh Edition. Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Jul 10 7:46:38 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.100.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A344837B5E2; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 07:46:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA189130; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:46:19 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709220353.04a82610@localhost> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000707102444.047ab100@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000709220353.04a82610@localhost> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:47:10 -0400 To: Brett Glass , Kris Kennaway From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: Conquering the Land of ISV (Was: No port of Opera?) Cc: Ignacio Cristerna , Frank Pawlak , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 10:08 PM -0600 7/9/00, Brett Glass wrote: >Seriously, I do seem to be getting shot in the back an awful >lot in this forum. I have some replies to make, especially to >some of the messages Jordan has written, but they'll have to >wait until tomorrow. I have a deadline tonight. I think it would be more intelligent to just shut up already. How many thousand messages have to go by before the clue-light turns on in your head? If you honestly believe that you have a great idea with this freebsd-emulator for linux, then write it. Otherwise, drop the topic. I think you're also deluding yourself by thinking this is a "Brett Glass vs Jordan" issue. As near as I can tell, it's "Brett Glass tilting at windmills all by himself" issue. It is quite possible that there are a lot of people here who agree with you. If THAT is true, then you should have a lot of people to help you implement this freebsd-emulator for linux, and it will be all that much the easier to prove your point. Me, I'm sympathetic to the IDEA of a freebsd-emulator, but I do not really believe it is practical. It's like saying the world will see a lot more Amiga programs if someone would just write an Win32 emulator for AmigaOS. If someone WANTS to write for the Win32 market, then why would they use some foreign API which merely adds another layer where something can go wrong? --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or drosih@rpi.edu Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Jul 10 12:15:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from garm.bart.nl (garm.bart.nl [194.158.170.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23BEC37B850 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:11:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asmodai@wxs.nl) Received: from daemon.ninth-circle.org (daemon.ninth-circle.org [195.38.216.226]) by garm.bart.nl (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e6AJBSX58498; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:11:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from asmodai@localhost) by daemon.ninth-circle.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA97069; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:09:17 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from asmodai) Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:09:17 +0200 From: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai To: Brett Glass Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD : Linux) :: (OS/2 : Windows))) Message-ID: <20000710210917.L86887@daemon.ninth-circle.org> References: <64378.963123976@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000709004010.049fbe90@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709004010.049fbe90@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Sun, Jul 09, 2000 at 12:43:00AM -0600 Organisation: Ninth-Circle Enterprises Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -On [20000709 09:53], Brett Glass (brett@lariat.org) wrote: >Yes, Jordan, it *is* a new concept -- and an ill-advised one. FreeBSD >is a team effort, and this should be as well. So far, one person has >volunteered help, but more are needed. First start work, THEN demand more henchmen. All the stuff I did was done by me, based on input by others, but I still did the work. Only after some basis was laid did others help out. I don't mind, its just how things are done in the FreeBSD world. -- Jeroen Ruigrok vd Werven/Asmodai asmodai@[wxs.nl|bart.nl|freebsd.org] Documentation nutter/C-rated Coder BSD: Technical excellence at its best The BSD Programmer's Documentation Project Whispering winds in moonlit wood, a totem oak once golden stood... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Jul 10 16:29:48 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from obie.softweyr.com (obie.softweyr.com [204.68.178.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF9AB37BD17; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 16:29:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from softweyr.com ([208.187.122.225]) by obie.softweyr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA25578; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:28:46 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Message-ID: <396752A6.ED719837@softweyr.com> Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 10:11:18 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.0-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Terry Lambert Cc: "Preston S. Wiley" , Brett Glass , David Scheidt , Kris Kennaway , Narvi , Dann Lunsford , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) References: <200007072132.OAA13600@usr05.primenet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Terry Lambert wrote: > > > > All of this would be a waste of effort compared to writing a *BSD* emulator > > > that would run on many platforms and get us more native ports. Making a > > > better Linux emulator is counterproductive. The better Linux emulation is > > > on BSD, the less likely it is that FreeBSD will get native ports of key > > > applications. > > > > Without Linux compatibility, BSD wouldn't have enough of a desktop user > > base for a company to even consider a native BSD port. The Linux > > compatibility was created to draw in users. (i.e. BSD can do everything > > Linux can, including run its binaries, plus this and this and this) > > The more users BSD has, the more likely there will be a native BSD port. > > Given this theory, someone should be going balls-to-the-wall > on SCO Xenix and UNIX and Solaris x86 emulations, even if the > Linux emulation is broken in the process... You're right, except none of the above have ANY marketing momentum at this time. SCO UNIX and Solaris x86 compatibility would get us some kick-ass server apps, though. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Jul 10 20:43:11 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.ptd.net (mail1.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3487737BAD1 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:43:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tms2@mail.ptd.net) Received: (qmail 396 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2000 03:43:08 -0000 Received: from du66.cli.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) (204.186.33.66) by mail.ptd.net with SMTP; 11 Jul 2000 03:43:08 -0000 Message-ID: <396A97AC.CEB9CBE9@mail.ptd.net> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:42:36 -0400 From: "Thomas M. Sommers" Organization: None X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 4.0-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Glass Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000706190244.0483ad70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000706201218.04a99100@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000706222258.046d9c00@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000708105237.0448ca90@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000708162010.050e5da0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000709002932.04980100@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Brett Glass wrote: > > At 12:17 AM 7/9/2000, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: > > >So the absence of Linux binary support will not necessarily mean more > >native ports, and will mean that programs that don't have native ports > >will not run. Which means fewer applications for FreeBSD. Which means > >fewer users for FreeBSD. Which means fewer native ports for FreeBSD. > >... > > Again, you appear to be intentionally misconstruing or ignoring what > I've said in earlier messages. I'm afraid that I can't take the time > to educate you about strategies and tactics if you simply can't (or > won't) get it. No, I'm not. I haven't mentioned your proposed FreeBSD emulation for Linux (if that's what you mean by ignoring your posts) because I was questioning your premise (and because it makes no sense). > >But these market forces will probably still not be strong enough to > >produce native ports. > > Yet again you ignore what I've written. If developers see a common API > and ABI which lets them develop for all of the many Linux distros AND > FreeBSD, they will jump at the chance to use it. They see one now; if they write for Linux, it will run on FreeBSD (mostly). If vendors are presented with the choice of writing for a large audience (Linux) and having a small audience (FreeBSD) be able to use the product under emulation, or writing for a small audience and having the large audience be able to run under emulation, which will they choose? If programs running under emulation are as bad as you say (not suitable for "mission-critical" uses), they would be fools to do as you suggest. If emulation is not as bad as you say, then it just doesn't matter that they now write for Linux and not FreeBSD. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Jul 10 20:50:18 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.ptd.net (mail1.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AE3F837BF4C for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:50:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tms2@mail.ptd.net) Received: (qmail 20227 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2000 03:50:16 -0000 Received: from du66.cli.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) (204.186.33.66) by mail.ptd.net with SMTP; 11 Jul 2000 03:50:16 -0000 Message-ID: <396A0A0B.E5D953B4@mail.ptd.net> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:38:19 -0400 From: "Thomas M. Sommers" Organization: None X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 4.0-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Schwartz Cc: Brett Glass , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG David Schwartz wrote: > > > But these market forces will probably still not be strong enough to > > produce native ports. > > > In a previous post you gave two reasons for considering Linux versions > > unsuitable: 1) lack of support, and 2) lack of performance/quality. > > > 1) If a vendor can't or won't provide resources to support Linux > > versions on FreeBSD, it almost certainly can't or won't provide the much > > greater resources to produce a native FreeBSD port. > > The really depends upon the resources/reward ratio. In many cases, it's a > lot easier to make a FreeBSD native version than try to get everything to > work right under emulation. > > The support headaches are approximately the same either way, at least in my > experience. If you're going to officially endorse the use of your Linux > build under FreeBSD, you're going to have to support it. > > > 2) If a particular Linux binary doesn't run well enough on FreeBSD, then > > the vendor's decision to make a native port will be the same regardless > > of the existence of Linux binary support. If the binary does run well > > enough, it doesn't really matter that it is not native; it gets the job > > done. Of course a native version would be nice, but it would not be > > necessary. > > What would happen in that case is that the vendor would be in a troubling > situation. They'd either have to rescind FreeBSD support (and then refund > money to FreeBSD customers and remove a platform from their support list) or > make a native build. I know that if my company were faced with that problem, > we'd make a native build in a second. (Of course, we already have one, but > that's not the point.) I was, for the purposes of argument, accepting Mr. Glass's assumption that the vendor did not support running the Linux binary on FreeBSD. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jul 11 1:20:34 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from shell.webmaster.com (ftp.webmaster.com [209.10.218.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3A2637B850 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 01:20:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from whenever ([209.133.29.2]) by shell.webmaster.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-12345L500S10000V35) with SMTP id com; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 01:20:01 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Thomas M. Sommers" Cc: Subject: RE: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 01:20:27 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <396A0A0B.E5D953B4@mail.ptd.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I was, for the purposes of argument, accepting Mr. Glass's assumption > that the vendor did not support running the Linux binary on FreeBSD. In that case, either the unsupported emulation version works well under FreeBSD or it doesn't. If it doesn't, then it might as well not work at all, in which case emulation is irrelevant. If it does, then emulation has given FreeBSD one more app. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jul 11 4:37:27 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from madcap.apk.net (madcap.apk.net [207.54.158.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E546237BEF1 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:37:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ipswitch@junior.apk.net) Received: from junior.apk.net (ipswitch@junior.apk.net [207.54.158.20]) by madcap.apk.net (8.9.3/8.9.3/apk.990812+rchk1.22+bspm1.13.1.5) with ESMTP id HAA02538 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 07:29:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from ipswitch@localhost) by junior.apk.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA16095 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 07:29:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Real-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 07:29:15 -0400 From: Ipswitch To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSD v. Unix Message-ID: <20000711072915.A9541@junior.apk.net> References: <85256918.004F1A18.00@Deimos.smed.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.6i In-Reply-To: <85256918.004F1A18.00@Deimos.smed.com>; from Joe.Warner@smed.com on Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 08:25:31AM -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 08:25:31AM -0600, Joe.Warner@smed.com wrote: > > > > I don't remember where exactly, but I have seen FreeBSD referred to as > > the "last true Unix." Is this a wholly accurate description? > > No. I don't think it's even partially accurate for any reasonable > definition of "partially". Recall that it shares no code with AT&T > UNIX up to and including the Seventh Edition. Some of the commercial ones are entitled to be called Unix. I believe that Sun can do this. SCO Unixware has, in many ways, the best claim on "Unix." It is now the definitive SysVr5 (and the only SysVr5 :-) It's pretty much meaningless. They're all the same, and they're all different. The overall concept is the same for all the unices, but the details differ a bit here and there. I've found things to admire about all of them. Stuart To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jul 11 10:46:38 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from garm.bart.nl (garm.bart.nl [194.158.170.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2E1537B653 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 10:46:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asmodai@wxs.nl) Received: from daemon.ninth-circle.org (daemon.ninth-circle.org [195.38.216.226]) by garm.bart.nl (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e6BHkQO31870; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:46:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from asmodai@localhost) by daemon.ninth-circle.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA00787; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:46:29 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from asmodai) Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:46:14 +0200 From: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai To: Brett Glass Cc: Greg Lehey , David Schwartz , advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) Message-ID: <20000711194614.V86887@daemon.ninth-circle.org> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709004740.049f9740@localhost> <20000709180613.I14455@wantadilla.lemis.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20000709123023.04adf950@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709123023.04adf950@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Sun, Jul 09, 2000 at 12:36:59PM -0600 Organisation: Ninth-Circle Enterprises Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -On [20000709 20:38], Brett Glass (brett@lariat.org) wrote: >At 02:36 AM 7/9/2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > >>*sigh* I had intended to keep out of this, but I must say I like your >>analysis. I'd like to add that we're not really talking about Linux >>vs. BSD here, we're talking about ABIs. > >We're not just talking about ABIs, Greg, it's APIs too. And support. APIs? Then you can forget it. APIs are based on a few parts which will ALWAYS be different from system to system except for stuff like POSIX, XPG, SUSv2 and the like. That's the charm of different OS's. Just look at glibc, FreeBSD's libc, HP-UX's libc, Window's libc. Well, have fun. Those are so completely different aside from ANSI-C supported features it won't work. -- Jeroen Ruigrok vd Werven/Asmodai asmodai@[wxs.nl|bart.nl|freebsd.org] Documentation nutter/C-rated Coder BSD: Technical excellence at its best The BSD Programmer's Documentation Project The wisdom of the wise, and the experience of ages, may be preserved by quotations... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jul 11 10:48:25 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from njord.bart.nl (njord.bart.nl [194.158.170.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3336F37BB3A; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 10:48:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asmodai@wxs.nl) Received: from daemon.ninth-circle.org (daemon.ninth-circle.org [195.38.216.226]) by njord.bart.nl (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e6BHmDD18397; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:48:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from asmodai@localhost) by daemon.ninth-circle.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA00794; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:48:14 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from asmodai) Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:48:14 +0200 From: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai To: Brett Glass Cc: David Schwartz , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) Message-ID: <20000711194814.W86887@daemon.ninth-circle.org> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709004740.049f9740@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000709122318.04a05100@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000709122318.04a05100@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Sun, Jul 09, 2000 at 12:29:53PM -0600 Organisation: Ninth-Circle Enterprises Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -On [20000709 20:38], Brett Glass (brett@lariat.org) wrote: >At 02:11 AM 7/9/2000, David Schwartz wrote: > >> While I think that this could potentially happen, I don't think it's >>inevitable. A lot hinges on how vocal and visible the FreeBSD crowd is. > >The FreeBSD crowd isn't nearly vocal enough! In fact, certain people seem >to advocate AGAINST advocacy. That we ask you to shut up doesn't mean we are against advocating FreeBSD. I personally asked you a few times to please shut up, and I don't say we should stop advocating against FreeBSD. Hell, I nagged at Highpoint Tech till they put a button on their frontpage. And that's what I meant. Don't start asking for help and whatnot, just do it and when you got something, THEN come back. -- Jeroen Ruigrok vd Werven/Asmodai asmodai@[wxs.nl|bart.nl|freebsd.org] Documentation nutter/C-rated Coder BSD: Technical excellence at its best The BSD Programmer's Documentation Project Might makes right... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jul 11 12: 9:10 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.ptd.net (mail1.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D160637B72E for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 12:09:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tms2@mail.ptd.net) Received: (qmail 20010 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2000 19:09:09 -0000 Received: from du79.cli.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) (204.186.33.79) by mail.ptd.net with SMTP; 11 Jul 2000 19:09:09 -0000 Message-ID: <396B70B6.18F037C5@mail.ptd.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:08:38 -0400 From: "Thomas M. Sommers" Organization: None X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 4.0-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Schwartz Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG David Schwartz wrote: > > > I was, for the purposes of argument, accepting Mr. Glass's assumption > > that the vendor did not support running the Linux binary on FreeBSD. > > In that case, either the unsupported emulation version works well under > FreeBSD or it doesn't. If it doesn't, then it might as well not work at all, > in which case emulation is irrelevant. If it does, then emulation has given > FreeBSD one more app. > > DS Exactly what I was trying to say. -- I do not approve of anything that tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone. -- Lady Bracknell To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jul 11 17:50: 6 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7D637C06D for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 17:49:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@wantadilla.lemis.com) Received: (from grog@localhost) by wantadilla.lemis.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA29489; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 10:19:43 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from grog) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 10:19:43 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: Joe.Warner@smed.com Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, magus@magus.users.xmission.com Subject: Re: BSD v. Unix Message-ID: <20000712101943.A29466@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <85256918.004F1A18.00@Deimos.smed.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i In-Reply-To: <85256918.004F1A18.00@Deimos.smed.com> Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Monday, 10 July 2000 at 8:25:31 -0600, Joe.Warner@smed.com wrote: >> On Saturday, 8 July 2000 at 2:12:31 -0600, Anthony Chavez wrote: >>> Fellow advocates: >>> >>> I don't remember where exactly, but I have seen FreeBSD referred to as >>> the "last true Unix." Is this a wholly accurate description? >> >> No. I don't think it's even partially accurate for any reasonable >> definition of "partially". Recall that it shares no code with AT&T >> UNIX up to and including the Seventh Edition. >> >>> Would it be correct to refer to *BSD in such a manner? >> >> No. In fact, we don't want to refer to "*BSD" at all: it sounds >> divisive. BSD without the '*' looks a lot better. >> >> As to "the last true UNIX": that way Holy Wars lie. I've most often >> heard it applied to the Seventh Edition. >> >>> I don't remember where exactly, but I have seen FreeBSD referred to as >>> the "last true Unix." Is this a wholly accurate description? >> >> No. I don't think it's even partially accurate for any reasonable >> definition of "partially". Recall that it shares no code with AT&T >> UNIX up to and including the Seventh Edition. > > Please don't take this personally or view this as critisism but I > recently purchased your book, "The Complete FreeBSD", and what an excellent > book it is! 8^) After reading the preface, I was under the impression > that FreeBSD is a raw UNIX system and has greater rights to call itself > UNIX than OS's like Linux because it's not a UNIX clone. Agreed. > I will quote from the preface: "FreeBSD is a high-performance > operating system derived from the Berkeley Software Distribution, or > BSD, the version of UNIX developed at the University of California > at Berkeley between 1975 and 1993. FreeBSD is not a UNIX clone. > Historically and technically, it has greater rights than UNIX System > V to be called UNIX. Legally, it may not be called UNIX, since UNIX > is now a registered trade mark of The Open Group. > Can you expand on this? Am I missing the mark on this? Were you > saying that FreeBSD can still be called UNIX but not the "last true > UNIX"? Well, there's a difference between saying "it has greater rights than UNIX System V to be called UNIX" and saying "it's the last true UNIX". In the context of my message that you quoted above, I was talking about all UNIX releases, and the Seventh Edition is the (a) common ancestor of just about all of them, including both System III/System V and the BSDs since 3BSD. FreeBSD is also no more of a descendent of 4BSD than BSD/OS, NetBSD or OpenBSD. In general, though, I think we've done this one to death. It's not a very useful metric in the first place. Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jul 11 18:17:26 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtp03.primenet.com (smtp03.primenet.com [206.165.6.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A01B37BA2E; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:17:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr06.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp03.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA00669; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:16:27 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr06.primenet.com(206.165.6.206) via SMTP by smtp03.primenet.com, id smtpdAAA8GaWob; Tue Jul 11 18:16:23 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA18556; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:16:51 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200007120116.SAA18556@usr06.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) To: wes@softweyr.com (Wes Peters) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 01:16:51 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), pwiley@cadabra.com (Preston S. Wiley), brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass), dscheidt@enteract.com (David Scheidt), kris@FreeBSD.ORG (Kris Kennaway), narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee (Narvi), dann@greycat.com (Dann Lunsford), chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <396752A6.ED719837@softweyr.com> from "Wes Peters" at Jul 08, 2000 10:11:18 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > > Without Linux compatibility, BSD wouldn't have enough of a desktop user > > > base for a company to even consider a native BSD port. The Linux > > > compatibility was created to draw in users. (i.e. BSD can do everything > > > Linux can, including run its binaries, plus this and this and this) > > > The more users BSD has, the more likely there will be a native BSD port. > > > > Given this theory, someone should be going balls-to-the-wall > > on SCO Xenix and UNIX and Solaris x86 emulations, even if the > > Linux emulation is broken in the process... > > You're right, except none of the above have ANY marketing momentum at this > time. SCO UNIX and Solaris x86 compatibility would get us some kick-ass > server apps, though. Given this theory, someone should be going balls-to-the-wall on Windows 2000 emulation, even if the SCO Xenix and UNIX, Solaris x86 emulation, and Linux emulation are broken in the process... Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jul 11 18:20:26 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in (theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in [144.16.71.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F3ACF37BAB9 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:20:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in) Received: (qmail 6134 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2000 01:20:10 -0000 Received: from theory7.physics.iisc.ernet.in (qmailr@144.16.71.127) by theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in with SMTP; 12 Jul 2000 01:20:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 32267 invoked by uid 211); 12 Jul 2000 01:20:07 -0000 Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 06:50:07 +0530 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Terry Lambert Cc: Wes Peters , "Preston S. Wiley" , Brett Glass , David Scheidt , Kris Kennaway , Narvi , Dann Lunsford , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) Message-ID: <20000712065007.A32166@physics.iisc.ernet.in> References: <396752A6.ED719837@softweyr.com> <200007120116.SAA18556@usr06.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <200007120116.SAA18556@usr06.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 01:16:51AM +0000 X-Operating-System: Linux 2.2.14 alpha Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Terry Lambert said on Jul 12, 2000 at 01:16:51: > > > > Without Linux compatibility, BSD wouldn't have enough of a desktop user > > > > base for a company to even consider a native BSD port. The Linux > > > > compatibility was created to draw in users. (i.e. BSD can do everything > > > > Linux can, including run its binaries, plus this and this and this) > > > > The more users BSD has, the more likely there will be a native BSD port. > > > > > > Given this theory, someone should be going balls-to-the-wall > > > on SCO Xenix and UNIX and Solaris x86 emulations, even if the > > > Linux emulation is broken in the process... > > > > You're right, except none of the above have ANY marketing momentum at this > > time. SCO UNIX and Solaris x86 compatibility would get us some kick-ass > > server apps, though. > > Given this theory, someone should be going balls-to-the-wall > on Windows 2000 emulation, even if the SCO Xenix and UNIX, Solaris > x86 emulation, and Linux emulation are broken in the process... Wine? Rahul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jul 11 18:22: 3 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from obie.softweyr.com (obie.softweyr.com [204.68.178.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CDC037BA52; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:21:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from softweyr.com ([208.187.122.225]) by obie.softweyr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA28766; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:21:50 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Message-ID: <396BC8D1.67E4D1E8@softweyr.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:24:33 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.0-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Terry Lambert Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) References: <200007120116.SAA18556@usr06.primenet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Terry Lambert wrote: > > > > > Without Linux compatibility, BSD wouldn't have enough of a desktop user > > > > base for a company to even consider a native BSD port. The Linux > > > > compatibility was created to draw in users. (i.e. BSD can do everything > > > > Linux can, including run its binaries, plus this and this and this) > > > > The more users BSD has, the more likely there will be a native BSD port. > > > > > > Given this theory, someone should be going balls-to-the-wall > > > on SCO Xenix and UNIX and Solaris x86 emulations, even if the > > > Linux emulation is broken in the process... > > > > You're right, except none of the above have ANY marketing momentum at this > > time. SCO UNIX and Solaris x86 compatibility would get us some kick-ass > > server apps, though. > > Given this theory, someone should be going balls-to-the-wall > on Windows 2000 emulation, even if the SCO Xenix and UNIX, Solaris > x86 emulation, and Linux emulation are broken in the process... Someone is. I'm sure they could use your help. Please take Brett with you. ;^) -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jul 12 10:21:16 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtp05.primenet.com (smtp05.primenet.com [206.165.6.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C724C37BF62; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 10:20:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr07.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp05.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA08107; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 10:21:11 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr07.primenet.com(206.165.6.207) via SMTP by smtp05.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAiFaWXp; Wed Jul 12 10:21:03 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr07.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA20583; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 10:20:28 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200007121720.KAA20583@usr07.primenet.com> Subject: Re: You've lost it (was Re:No port of Opera? (Was: ((FreeBSD :Linux) :: To: stuyman@confusion.net (Laurence Berland) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 17:20:28 +0000 (GMT) Cc: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass), wes@softweyr.com (Wes Peters), fpawlak@execpc.com (Frank Pawlak), jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com (Jordan K. Hubbard), chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <3967D830.F8F0E918@confusion.net> from "Laurence Berland" at Jul 08, 2000 09:41:04 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > >So we must not let this happen to FreeBSD, we must have native > > >support!!! How do we get this? We implement the FreeBSD api on Linux, > > >so that people will write to FreeBSD instead. Great! But, let's think > > >for a second. If it's bad to use emulators, if it hurts your platform > > >of choice, then why on earth do you think that a Linux user would be > > >fooled into using FreeBSD emulation? > > > > Because they will mistake it for a feature. > > At a bare minimum that's a naive assumption, and at worst it's an insult > to the intelligence of Linux users. Just because they don't prefer the > OS that you and I prefer doesn't mean they aren't smart enough to see > this as what it is. The only reason they would adopt this emulation is > if we can show them real gain through its use. If nothing else, this is > a chicken-and-egg problem. They wont want it until they can run FreeBSD > apps that dont have linux ports, which wont exist until they use the > FreeBSD emulator, which they won't get until the apps exist... There are FreeBSD applications which do not exist on Linux. The entire world is not Open Source yet (thank God). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jul 12 15: 3:20 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in (theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in [144.16.71.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7BCE737B75A for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 15:03:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in) Received: (qmail 5894 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2000 22:03:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO theory3.physics.iisc.ernet.in) (qmailr@144.16.71.158) by theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in with SMTP; 12 Jul 2000 22:03:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 2301 invoked by uid 211); 12 Jul 2000 22:03:07 -0000 Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 03:33:07 +0530 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: addition to Sketch gallery Message-ID: <20000713033307.E2015@physics.iisc.ernet.in> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.0-test3 i686 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG http://sketch.sourceforge.net/gallery.html#N3 - Rahul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jul 14 15:16:15 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 141FE37B734; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 15:16:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@ymmv.com) Received: from mustang.ymmv.com (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA10011; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:15:59 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000714150103.04a3cc20@localhost> X-Sender: X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:15:50 -0600 To: chat@FreeBSD.org, advocacy@FreeBSD.org From: Brett Subject: What's Important (Emulation, Security Advisories, Life, and Fun) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I'm writing this message from a booth smack dab in the middle of Laramie's annual Jubilee Days street fair, surrounded by rodeo clowns, laughing children, pretty girls, music (currently a harper and guitarist on either side), and happy people with painted faces. We even have Internet in the booth this year, with all of the BSDs' logos proudly displayed, and are inviting all and sundry to come, check their e-mail, and chat. All of which puts the postings of the past week in good perspective. People sometimes forget that the BSDs, like everything else that's important in life, are about PEOPLE. It's not how much code you write, or how many PRs you submit, or how many clever hacks you take credit for (this, like most other methods of "keeping score," does not measure the value of ideas or of people). What's really important is how much people's lives are improved as a result of the platform being there. [I step away from the keyboard so that a clown -- I think there's someone I know under that costume! -- can safely douse me with a Super Soaker. Oooh, I'm shivering now, but it felt good and I'm finally dry enough to continue writing.] Fighting about ideas, instead of discussing them, hurts that fun. It also stunts the growth of the platform by demoralizing everyone (except those who take a perverse joy in conflict). Attempting to drive away people who are trying to advance and evangelize the platform hurts not only the project but those who would have been reached. And allowing people-hostile agendas -- such as the poisonous spite of the FSF and Richard Stallman's almost unfathomable bitterness -- to undermine more friendly ones and do their hurtful damage is worst of all. Which is why the vitriol I've seen on the lists during the past week disturbed me so much. The people behind the BSDs are known for their fierce individualism and opinionated nature, but to attack an idea out of hostility for the person who advanced it, rather than on its own merits, crosses the line into destructive name calling and bickering. There is such a thing as tasteful repartee, but when it goes beyond blowing off steam and begins to be hurtful it's inappropriate and destructive. I've seen that line crossed several times this week, by people who I would hope would know better, and it saddens me. It is also disturbing that people are filtering postings by author, rather than according to interests, and boasting that they are doing so -- apparently taking pride in ad hominem filtering of ideas and content. This is not the way that things should be, people. Disagreement and healthy discussion are fine, but to attempt to squelch ideas with which one does not agree is not. Ego also appears to play a destructive role here when it should not. For example, my remarks about Linux emulation apparently put Jordan on the defensive. Having embraced it as a strategy, he seems to have taken it personally when it was pointed out (and not just by me; Dann Lunsford started the discussion) that this strategy has harmed platforms in the past and was in fact a key factor in the demise of OS/2. None of those remarks were intended as a personal attack on Jordan, and yet he took the matter very personally and responded with personal attacks directed at me. In fact, Jordan has a tendency to take any critical remark -- even if it's constructive criticism -- as either a personal affront or as a challenge to his position as nominal leader of the development effort. There is no call for this. What matters is, again, the benefits which people gain from the platform. Because emulation compromises the success of the platform and thus the good it can do, it is valid to critique emulation as a strategy. This is what matters, not personal pride, or ego, or NIH. These problems were even more obvious in the discussion regarding the subject lines of security advisories affected FreeBSD ports. My messages pointing out the problem were supported by many similar ones and many positive suggestions. But a few flamers -- again, either due to ego or ad hominem considerations -- turned what should have been a few messages and suggestions into an acerbic flame-fest. If there's any challenge for the BSDs -- not just FreeBSD, but all of them -- it's conquering these problems and making the projects inclusive and fun. Too many bright and talented people who are now cornerstones of the Linux world have been driven away from the BSDs by the unnecessary conflicts I've mentioned here. Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I think that this can change and that the BSDs can achieve success commensurate with their technical merit and the ethical nature of their licensing. I'm doing my part; I've undertaken substantial financial risk and have engaged in efforts to promote the BSDs which go far beyond what people on these groups know about. I wouldn't make such an investment, or persist in the time-consuming discussions on these groups, if I were not optimistic about the likelihood of overcoming these problems. Go ahead and shoot at me if you will; nitpick about the style of my messages; attempt to drive me away with insults. All you'll do is prove that you care more about winning some petty battle than in advancing the platform and maximizing the good it does for everyone. And now, I'm going to take a much-needed break from writing and find myself some food. And maybe a Super Soaker. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jul 15 14:10:39 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtppop3.gte.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 536D137B6FC; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 14:10:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from res03db2@gte.net) Received: from evrtwa1-ar4-146-005.dsl.gtei.net (evrtwa1-ar4-146-005.dsl.gtei.net [4.34.146.5]) by smtppop3.gte.net with ESMTP ; id QAA3239151 Sat, 15 Jul 2000 16:09:07 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 14:09:30 -0700 (PDT) From: The Clark Family X-Sender: res03db2@orthanc.dsl.gtei.net To: Brett Glass Cc: David Scheidt , Kris Kennaway , Narvi , Dann Lunsford , chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000706190244.0483ad70@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG We have a FreeBSD emulator. Its called NetBSD. [RC] On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Brett Glass wrote: > At 04:54 PM 7/6/2000, David Scheidt wrote: > > >Only because no one has written a BSD licensed replacement for them. I'm > >sure that if someone would supply them, they'd get committed. > > Duplicating all of the idiosyncrasies of the Linux libraries would > require a "clean room" approach, so it would take at least two people -- > not one. Also, ongoing "clean rooming" would be necessary to accommodate > changes to Linux as they came. > > All of this would be a waste of effort compared to writing a *BSD* emulator > that would run on many platforms and get us more native ports. Making a > better Linux emulator is counterproductive. The better Linux emulation is > on BSD, the less likely it is that FreeBSD will get native ports of key > applications. > > --Brett > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jul 15 17:52:47 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A9F37B5AA; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 17:52:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from des@flood.ping.uio.no) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA07835; Sun, 16 Jul 2000 02:52:30 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from des@flood.ping.uio.no) To: Brett Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: What's Important (Emulation, Security Advisories, Life, and Fun) References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000714150103.04a3cc20@localhost> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 16 Jul 2000 02:52:30 +0200 In-Reply-To: Brett's message of "Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:15:50 -0600" Message-ID: Lines: 11 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) Emacs/20.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Brett writes: > [blablabla] Can you please stick to *one* address so I don't have to update my killfile all the time? Sheesh. Plonk. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message