From owner-freebsd-advocacy  Wed Nov 29 21:48:51 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.6.134])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 72FDE37B402; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:48:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by smtp04.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA29086;
	Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:44:53 -0700 (MST)
Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208)
 via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAssaaS4; Wed Nov 29 22:44:44 2000
Received: (from tlambert@localhost)
	by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA05850;
	Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:48:34 -0700 (MST)
From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
Message-Id: <200011300548.WAA05850@usr08.primenet.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer
To: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass)
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 05:48:33 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-chat@freebsd.org,
	freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129121021.049b31b0@localhost> from "Brett Glass" at Nov 29, 2000 12:14:10 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

> >Or SAMBA, which we also shipped on the box?
> >
> >These were tactical, not strategic; shipping source for these
> >wouldn't matter, since they don't contain any intellectual
> >property that matters to anyone.  Let people demand the code
> >if they want: we include a web page with links to the source
> >to everything they could demand, right on the box.
> 
> It doesn't seem to me that this would avoid the problems
> you mentioned earlier. GPLed code is still infectious.

Only if you link against it.  When was the last time you
linked against "grep"?


> >If you think these things would need to be exposed, then
> >you've missed the concept of "embedded system": all InterJet
> >administration was and is intended to be performed via a
> >limited set of externalized interfaces, predominantly the
> >web UI.
> 
> I understand embedded systems very well -- that's one of the
> things I do. However, as we all know, selection is a much
> less powerful paradigm than specification, and fixing a
> box or using it to its full potential often requires the
> power of a command line. What's more, the strategic UI code
> almost certainly calls on such utilities to do its work and 
> therefore depends upon them.

People who needed access to a command line, and could actually
use one, were such access granted, were not in our target
market.

There is a Ricoh photocopier and a Ricoh document capture
device, both based on FreeBSD.  I rather seriously doubt
that they ship the code in such a state that you could get
a command line, period.


					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