From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Nov 27 7:29:34 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from ns2.dmz.infoworks.net (unknown [216.220.137.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 192D637B479 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 07:29:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from DOMINO01.dmz.infoworks.net (domino01.dmz.infoworks.net [192.168.209.2]) by ns2.dmz.infoworks.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07959; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:34:31 -0600 From: charlie@infoworks.net Subject: Re: Any artists interested in doing a FreeBSD animated GIF To: Christian Ambrose Cc: Rebecca Visger , freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.3 March 21, 2000 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 15:30:14 GMT Message-ID: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on DOMINO01/infoworks(Release 5.0 |March 30, 1999) at 11/27/2000 09:30:24 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG (Sorry about the mailer... my company has just switched to Lotus Notes.) I think the URL is unnecessary, as they can visit the site by clicking on the banner. If I'm interested in someone's banner ad, and I know the URL, I can just make a mental note to visit there later. Knowing where the URL leads takes away the 'sense of urgency' that tells me I have to click through RIGHT NOW! Also, the extra real estate you'd get by removing the URL could be used, as Christian suggests, to make the 'It's Free!' more prominent. In any case, it's very impressive and professional looking, and I think you've done a great job with it. -Charlie Christian Ambrose To: Rebecca Visger , Sent by: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org owner-freebsd-advocacy@F cc: reeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Any artists interested in doing a FreeBSD animated GIF 11/23/00 01:24 AM That is really cool, but the "it's free!" part may be a little too subtle. On a banner ad, a person (at least I do) seems to stop looking after the first few points have been made. Just my two cents. Rebecca Visger wrote: > > hey boys, how about this one: > > http://bean.internal.org/freebsd_banner.html > > comments/suggestions? > > -Rebecca "Bean" Visger > > 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 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Nov 27 14:18:54 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mss.rdc2.nsw.optushome.com.au (ha1.rdc2.nsw.optushome.com.au [203.164.2.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378BB37B4CF for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:18:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from ellipsis.briz.net ([203.164.24.4]) by mss.rdc2.nsw.optushome.com.au (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with ESMTP id <20001127221813.FXMQ28304.mss.rdc2.nsw.optushome.com.au@ellipsis.briz.net>; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:18:13 +1100 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001128081547.00bfcdf0@briz.net> X-Sender: soltan@briz.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 08:18:03 +1000 To: charlie@infoworks.net From: Mike Subject: Re: Any artists interested in doing a FreeBSD animated GIF Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: 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 think the URL is unnecessary, as they can visit the site by clicking on the >banner. You've obviously never printed out a web page and seen a banner later that's perked your interest. Without a URL on the banner there is no way of telling where it goes. mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Nov 27 14:24: 3 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from server4.reno.powernet.net (server4.reno.powernet.net [216.88.152.247]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3F7C37B4CF for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:23:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.105] (sjweb.reno.powernet.net [64.240.163.95]) by server4.reno.powernet.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA24190 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:23:55 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rvisger_sjmarketing@pop2.sierraweb.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001128081547.00bfcdf0@briz.net> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001128081547.00bfcdf0@briz.net> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:23:50 -0800 To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org From: Bean Visger Subject: Re: Any artists interested in doing a FreeBSD animated GIF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >>I think the URL is unnecessary, as they can visit the site by clicking on the >>banner. > >You've obviously never printed out a web page and seen a banner >later that's perked your interest. Without a URL on the banner there >is no way of telling where it goes. people still print?! ;) I'll have another revision sometime today or tomorrow with some of the better suggestiosn :D -Bean To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Nov 28 6:32:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from oden.exmandato.se (oden.exmandato.se [192.71.33.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1B037B400; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:32:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from servicefactory.se (root@oden.exmandato.se [192.71.33.1]) by oden.exmandato.se (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA08185; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 15:32:08 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <3A23C1E7.9AA49BA1@servicefactory.se> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 15:32:07 +0100 From: Jonas Bulow X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-mobie@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG http://www.pc.ibm.com/qtechinfo/MIGR-4QHLS4.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Nov 28 8:27: 4 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from epcot.revenio.com (unknown [209.202.137.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3CC1E37B401 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 08:27:02 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 80635 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2000 16:27:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gaston) (10.0.3.49) by epcot.revenio.com with SMTP; 28 Nov 2000 16:27:01 -0000 Message-ID: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> Reply-To: "Nicholas Basila" From: "Nicholas Basila" To: Cc: , , References: Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:21:16 -0500 Organization: Revenio, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hmmm, Well, I never liked their laptops, anyway. I'm surprised they don't support RH Linux. I'm glad to know that they support all the lousy MS operating systems ... > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonas Bulow [mailto:jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se] > Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 9:32 AM > To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; freebsd-mobie@freebsd.org; > freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org > Subject: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer > Thinkpads > > > http://www.pc.ibm.com/qtechinfo/MIGR-4QHLS4.html > > > 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 Tue Nov 28 8:36: 4 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 773C437B400; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 08:35:59 -0800 (PST) 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 JAA15071; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:35:25 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001128093226.048f4cf0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:35:17 -0700 To: "Nicholas Basila" , From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads Cc: , , In-Reply-To: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG IBM's tactics are the old "bait and switch." They want users to move to AIX, not FreeBSD or Linux. Unfortunately, their PR people have pretended to jump on the Linux bandwagon in a big way, and this hurts the BSDs. --Brett At 09:21 AM 11/28/2000, Nicholas Basila wrote: >Hmmm, > > Well, I never liked their laptops, anyway. I'm surprised they don't >support RH Linux. I'm glad to know that they support all the lousy MS >operating systems ... > > > >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jonas Bulow [mailto:jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 9:32 AM >> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; freebsd-mobie@freebsd.org; >> freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org >> Subject: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer >> Thinkpads >> >> >> http://www.pc.ibm.com/qtechinfo/MIGR-4QHLS4.html >> >> >> 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-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 Tue Nov 28 8:51:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mass.osd.bsdi.com (adsl-63-202-177-187.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.202.177.187]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF09837B400; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 08:51:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mass.osd.bsdi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eASGwoF25493; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 08:58:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msmith@mass.osd.bsdi.com) Message-Id: <200011281658.eASGwoF25493@mass.osd.bsdi.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Brett Glass Cc: "Nicholas Basila" , jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:35:17 MST." <4.3.2.7.2.20001128093226.048f4cf0@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 08:58:49 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG If anyone listening to this lives near Brett, we'd all appreciate it if you'd drop by and talk him into taking up the medication again. Thanks. > IBM's tactics are the old "bait and switch." They want users to > move to AIX, not FreeBSD or Linux. Unfortunately, their PR people > have pretended to jump on the Linux bandwagon in a big way, and > this hurts the BSDs. > > --Brett > > At 09:21 AM 11/28/2000, Nicholas Basila wrote: > > >Hmmm, > > > > Well, I never liked their laptops, anyway. I'm surprised they don't > >support RH Linux. I'm glad to know that they support all the lousy MS > >operating systems ... > > > > > > > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Jonas Bulow [mailto:jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se] > >> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 9:32 AM > >> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; freebsd-mobie@freebsd.org; > >> freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org > >> Subject: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer > >> Thinkpads > >> > >> > >> http://www.pc.ibm.com/qtechinfo/MIGR-4QHLS4.html > >> > >> > >> 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-chat" in the body of the message > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message > -- ... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt] V I C T O R Y N O T V E N G E A N C E To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Nov 28 9:58: 3 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 AF6AD37B404; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:57:57 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA05195; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 10:54:05 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpdAAASPaG3j; Tue Nov 28 10:53:57 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA09532; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 10:57:28 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200011281757.KAA09532@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads To: msmith@FreeBSD.ORG (Mike Smith) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:57:28 +0000 (GMT) Cc: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass), nbasila@epcot.revenio.com (Nicholas Basila), jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200011281658.eASGwoF25493@mass.osd.bsdi.com> from "Mike Smith" at Nov 28, 2000 08:58:49 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 > > >Hmmm, > > > > > > Well, I never liked their laptops, anyway. I'm surprised they don't > > >support RH Linux. I'm glad to know that they support all the lousy MS > > >operating systems ... > > > > IBM's tactics are the old "bait and switch." They want users to > > move to AIX, not FreeBSD or Linux. Unfortunately, their PR people > > have pretended to jump on the Linux bandwagon in a big way, and > > this hurts the BSDs. > > If anyone listening to this lives near Brett, we'd all appreciate it if > you'd drop by and talk him into taking up the medication again. I think he was commenting on the surprise expressed that RH Linux was not listed as a supported OS. As a former insider, I have to say that there is a very large and vocal Linux advocacy, to the point of having internal conferences on Linux, hosted at Almaden research center, where one of the primary focii was internal Linux advocacy. The IBM PR machine loves Linux, since Linux gets you column-space in trade rags, and anything that looks like an attack on the Microsoft oligarchy/hegemony is considered "fit to print", or at least "proper editorial cannon fodder". But I have to say that I'm not at all surprised about the Linux "omission", or the phrasing of the statements about "Caldera OpenLinux" and "Do not install a non-supported operating system". The lawyers have quite a different take: if you want to use GPL code, or any other code with a source distribution requirement, you are required to attend a "handling toxic waste that will destroy your patent rights" class, before you are allowed to even touch it. You also have to get "cleared" copies of the code from internal IBM servers, so that IBM patents aren't infringed by you using a newer version of the code. There is an 18 page presentation that most of the internal search engines will point you to, when you are going through the exercise of trying to find information internally. It boils down to "how to double-glove before putting on your biohazard suit to enter a class 5 hot zone containing live Ebola". FWIW, the "recovery procedure" they allude to is to use their recovery CDROM, which will basically repartition and reinstall the default software that came with the machine. I'll guess that they don't recommend specific recovery instructions (and refer only to "various utilities") as a hold harmless measure, since the recovery CD will effectively blow away any user data on the drive, and they don't want to be held responsible for that. 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 Nov 28 10:10: 6 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mass.osd.bsdi.com (adsl-63-202-177-187.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.202.177.187]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FEA937B404; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 10:09:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mass.osd.bsdi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eASIHSF25817; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 10:17:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msmith@mass.osd.bsdi.com) Message-Id: <200011281817.eASIHSF25817@mass.osd.bsdi.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Terry Lambert Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Reply-To: /dev/null@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:57:28 GMT." <200011281757.KAA09532@usr08.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 10:17:28 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG This was crossposted to too many lists, reply-to set to a useful subset. > FWIW, the "recovery procedure" they allude to is to use their > recovery CDROM, which will basically repartition and reinstall the > default software that came with the machine. I'll guess that they > don't recommend specific recovery instructions (and refer only to > "various utilities") as a hold harmless measure, since the > recovery CD will effectively blow away any user data on the drive, > and they don't want to be held responsible for that. Actually, the "recovery procedure" involves removing the harddisk, since the BIOS code in question that fails does so before the boot process starts, and with a FreeBSD partition on the disk, you never get to boot at all. This has been discussed on -mobile already, and any interested party is encouraged to consult the archives. -- ... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt] V I C T O R Y N O T V E N G E A N C E To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Nov 28 10:27:15 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A23D137B402; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 10:26:52 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA18217; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:22:29 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpdAAA.Ga4FJ; Tue Nov 28 11:22:21 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA10263; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:26:38 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200011281826.LAA10263@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads To: /dev/null@FreeBSD.ORG Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 18:26:38 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200011281817.eASIHSF25817@mass.osd.bsdi.com> from "Mike Smith" at Nov 28, 2000 10:17:28 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 > > FWIW, the "recovery procedure" they allude to is to use their > > recovery CDROM, which will basically repartition and reinstall the > > default software that came with the machine. I'll guess that they > > don't recommend specific recovery instructions (and refer only to > > "various utilities") as a hold harmless measure, since the > > recovery CD will effectively blow away any user data on the drive, > > and they don't want to be held responsible for that. > > Actually, the "recovery procedure" involves removing the harddisk, since > the BIOS code in question that fails does so before the boot process > starts, and with a FreeBSD partition on the disk, you never get to boot > at all. > > This has been discussed on -mobile already, and any interested party is > encouraged to consult the archives. I think this presumes that the HD is examined at boot time, instead of stopping once the system sees a bootable CDROM, which is the normal case when doing a recovery. You should talk to Evan Oldford (evan@whistle.com, eoldford@us.ibm.com) about his experiences recovering with the recovery CDROM, after having trashed several models of thinkpads with FreeBSD installs gone wrong. Obviously, you could also recover by removing the hard drive and zapping it, but the technical note referred to by the original author of this subject specifically states that there are utilities that can recover the HDD to a bootable state: "The HDD can be recovered to make the system bootable again using various utilities. However, IBM does not recommend any specific utility or support the use of any of these utilities." I think the "magic" combo to force it to ignore the HDD is something like "Alt-F6" during boot, but don't quote me: it's printed in the ThinkPad manual that comes with each ThinkPad. 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 Nov 28 21:22:54 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from echunga.lemis.com (freebie.lemis.com [192.109.197.137]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B63A637B402; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 21:22:46 -0800 (PST) Received: (from grog@localhost) by echunga.lemis.com (8.11.1/8.9.3) id eAT5Hww47427; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:47:58 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from grog) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:47:48 +1030 From: Greg Lehey To: Nicholas Basila Cc: jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-mobie@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads Message-ID: <20001129154748.A47200@echunga.lemis.com> References: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston>; from nbasila@epcot.revenio.com on Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 11:21:16AM -0500 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 Tuesday, 28 November 2000 at 11:21:16 -0500, Nicholas Basila wrote: > On Tuesday, November 28, 2000 9:32 AM, Jonas Bulow wrote: >> >> http://www.pc.ibm.com/qtechinfo/MIGR-4QHLS4.html > > Well, I never liked their laptops, anyway. I'm surprised they don't > support RH Linux. I'm glad to know that they support all the lousy MS > operating systems ... I think this gives the lie to the whole thing. I suspect it's yet another case of left hand/right hand syndrome, and I wouldn't be surprised if it got revoked. 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 Wed Nov 29 9: 2:36 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from epcot.revenio.com (unknown [209.202.137.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1539737B401 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:02:33 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 73171 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 17:02:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO epcot.revenio.com) (10.0.3.49) by epcot.revenio.com with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 17:02:32 -0000 Message-ID: <3A2536A7.EA05719B@epcot.revenio.com> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:02:32 -0500 From: Nicholas Basila Organization: Revenio, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Lehey Cc: jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads References: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> <20001129154748.A47200@echunga.lemis.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I think that IBM ultimately wants to sell these laptops any way they can ... That means with non-MS operating systems. I just wonder how long it will take. Nicholas Greg Lehey wrote: > On Tuesday, 28 November 2000 at 11:21:16 -0500, Nicholas Basila wrote: > > On Tuesday, November 28, 2000 9:32 AM, Jonas Bulow wrote: > >> > >> http://www.pc.ibm.com/qtechinfo/MIGR-4QHLS4.html > > > > Well, I never liked their laptops, anyway. I'm surprised they don't > > support RH Linux. I'm glad to know that they support all the lousy MS > > operating systems ... > > I think this gives the lie to the whole thing. I suspect it's yet > another case of left hand/right hand syndrome, and I wouldn't be > surprised if it got revoked. > > 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 Wed Nov 29 9:23:19 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1480637B402 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:21:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=Fools trust ident!) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 141Aw5-0000AS-00; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:22:25 -0700 Message-ID: <3A253B51.758D7AF9@softweyr.com> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:22:25 -0700 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nicholas Basila Cc: Greg Lehey , jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads References: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> <20001129154748.A47200@echunga.lemis.com> <3A2536A7.EA05719B@epcot.revenio.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Nicholas Basila wrote: > > I think that IBM ultimately wants to sell these laptops any way they can ... > That means with non-MS operating systems. I just wonder how long it will > take. Don't be silly. If they think it will generate more support calls than revenue, they will step over us silly BSD users in a heartbeat, chasing after the next 50,000-unit corporate sale. -- "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 Nov 29 9:27:56 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from epcot.revenio.com (unknown [209.202.137.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CE54D37B400 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:27:54 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 74847 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 17:27:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO epcot.revenio.com) (10.0.3.49) by epcot.revenio.com with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 17:27:54 -0000 Message-ID: <3A253C9A.EBD363D7@epcot.revenio.com> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:27:54 -0500 From: Nicholas Basila Organization: Revenio, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wes Peters Cc: Greg Lehey , jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads References: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> <20001129154748.A47200@echunga.lemis.com> <3A2536A7.EA05719B@epcot.revenio.com> <3A253B51.758D7AF9@softweyr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ah, but I'd bet that they'd be willing to support RH Linux at some point. If RH Linux will run on it, FreeBSD probably would, too. Of course, I know they'd never ever support FreeBSD, but having it work on these laptops without issues would be good. Wes Peters wrote: > Nicholas Basila wrote: > > > > I think that IBM ultimately wants to sell these laptops any way they can ... > > That means with non-MS operating systems. I just wonder how long it will > > take. > > Don't be silly. If they think it will generate more support calls than > revenue, they will step over us silly BSD users in a heartbeat, chasing > after the next 50,000-unit corporate sale. > > -- > "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 Nov 29 9:32:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 594B537B401 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:32:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id eATHWHH40294 ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:32:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id SAA78557 ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:32:19 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:32:19 +0100 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Nicholas Basila Cc: Wes Peters , Greg Lehey , jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads Message-ID: <20001129183219.C78076@lpt.ens.fr> Mail-Followup-To: Nicholas Basila , Wes Peters , Greg Lehey , jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> <20001129154748.A47200@echunga.lemis.com> <3A2536A7.EA05719B@epcot.revenio.com> <3A253B51.758D7AF9@softweyr.com> <3A253C9A.EBD363D7@epcot.revenio.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3A253C9A.EBD363D7@epcot.revenio.com>; from nbasila@epcot.revenio.com on Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 12:27:54PM -0500 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Nicholas Basila said on Nov 29, 2000 at 12:27:54: > Ah, but I'd bet that they'd be willing to support RH Linux at some > point. If RH Linux will run on it, FreeBSD probably would, too. Of > course, I know they'd never ever support FreeBSD, but having it work > on these laptops without issues would be good. I don't quite follow that reasoning. Caldera linux does run on it now, but FreeBSD doesn't; why would Red Hat running on it change anything? (In fact RH likely does run on it, it's just not "supported" by IBM. I think they entered into a deal with Caldera over linux on thinkpads.) R. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 9:39: 0 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from epcot.revenio.com (unknown [209.202.137.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BF9B437B401 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:38:58 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 75491 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 17:38:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO epcot.revenio.com) (10.0.3.49) by epcot.revenio.com with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 17:38:57 -0000 Message-ID: <3A253F31.6BCE88CC@epcot.revenio.com> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:38:57 -0500 From: Nicholas Basila Organization: Revenio, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rahul Siddharthan Cc: Wes Peters , Greg Lehey , jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads References: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> <20001129154748.A47200@echunga.lemis.com> <3A2536A7.EA05719B@epcot.revenio.com> <3A253B51.758D7AF9@softweyr.com> <3A253C9A.EBD363D7@epcot.revenio.com> <20001129183219.C78076@lpt.ens.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I didn't know that Caldera worked on these models. Where exactly does FreeBSD fail? At boot time? Is it merely something strange in the bios? As I've never tried installing either FreeBSD or Linux on one of these laptops, I can't really say much of anything. Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > Nicholas Basila said on Nov 29, 2000 at 12:27:54: > > > Ah, but I'd bet that they'd be willing to support RH Linux at some > > point. If RH Linux will run on it, FreeBSD probably would, too. Of > > course, I know they'd never ever support FreeBSD, but having it work > > on these laptops without issues would be good. > > I don't quite follow that reasoning. Caldera linux does run on it > now, but FreeBSD doesn't; why would Red Hat running on it change > anything? (In fact RH likely does run on it, it's just not > "supported" by IBM. I think they entered into a deal with Caldera > over linux on thinkpads.) > > R. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 9:44: 0 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 7D3B637B698; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:43:54 -0800 (PST) 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 KAA28537; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:43:37 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129104056.0496b420@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:43:29 -0700 To: Terry Lambert , msmith@FreeBSD.ORG (Mike Smith) From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads Cc: nbasila@epcot.revenio.com (Nicholas Basila), jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200011281757.KAA09532@usr08.primenet.com> References: <200011281658.eASGwoF25493@mass.osd.bsdi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 10:57 AM 11/28/2000, Terry Lambert wrote: ... >But I have to say that I'm not at all surprised about the Linux >"omission", or the phrasing of the statements about "Caldera >OpenLinux" and "Do not install a non-supported operating system". > >The lawyers have quite a different take: if you want to use GPL >code, or any other code with a source distribution requirement, >you are required to attend a "handling toxic waste that will >destroy your patent rights" class, before you are allowed to even >touch it. You also have to get "cleared" copies of the code from >internal IBM servers, so that IBM patents aren't infringed by you >using a newer version of the code. > >There is an 18 page presentation that most of the internal search >engines will point you to, when you are going through the exercise >of trying to find information internally. It boils down to "how >to double-glove before putting on your biohazard suit to enter a >class 5 hot zone containing live Ebola". When IBM acquired Whistle, it acquired a product that included, and in fact depended upon, GPLed code because FreeBSD does. How did it handle this situation? Is there any chance that IBM might be interested in helping to free the BSDs from the GPL? --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 9:47:39 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 9F75C37B400; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:47:35 -0800 (PST) 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 KAA28591; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:47:29 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129104503.049744e0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:47:23 -0700 To: Terry Lambert , /dev/null@FreeBSD.ORG From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200011281826.LAA10263@usr08.primenet.com> References: <200011281817.eASIHSF25817@mass.osd.bsdi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 11:26 AM 11/28/2000, Terry Lambert wrote: >I think this presumes that the HD is examined at boot time, >instead of stopping once the system sees a bootable CDROM, >which is the normal case when doing a recovery. If the problem is a BIOS that can't handle a FreeBSD boot sector, perhaps a special boot sector with replacement hard disk BIOS code -- such as the one included in OnTrack Disk Manager -- would serve as a workaround. The problem could also be that the laptop has a suspend/resume feature that's looking for a special partition or DOS file and not finding it. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 10: 1: 7 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from oden.exmandato.se (oden.exmandato.se [192.71.33.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C2B837B402 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:01:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from servicefactory.se (root@oden.exmandato.se [192.71.33.1]) by oden.exmandato.se (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA12522; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:01:00 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <3A25445B.8DCE1BD4@servicefactory.se> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:00:59 +0100 From: Jonas Bulow X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nicholas Basila Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads References: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> <20001129154748.A47200@echunga.lemis.com> <3A2536A7.EA05719B@epcot.revenio.com> <3A253B51.758D7AF9@softweyr.com> <3A253C9A.EBD363D7@epcot.revenio.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG (trimmed CC) Hi, I think some of us is missing the point here. The problem seems to be that IBM does not respect the partition type 165. Everything (well) not using partition type 165 will run fine on it. Maybe FreeBSD should override partition type 2. I think nobody will make that one obselete. :-) /j Nicholas Basila wrote: > > Ah, but I'd bet that they'd be willing to support RH Linux at some point. If RH > Linux will run on it, FreeBSD probably would, too. Of course, I know they'd never > ever support FreeBSD, but having it work on these laptops without issues would be > good. > > Wes Peters wrote: > > > Nicholas Basila wrote: > > > > > > I think that IBM ultimately wants to sell these laptops any way they can ... > > > That means with non-MS operating systems. I just wonder how long it will > > > take. > > > > Don't be silly. If they think it will generate more support calls than > > revenue, they will step over us silly BSD users in a heartbeat, chasing > > after the next 50,000-unit corporate sale. > > > > -- > > "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 Nov 29 10:10:49 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FE1F37B400; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:10:44 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA05140; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:06:20 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAhzai0j; Wed Nov 29 11:06:07 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA19425; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:10:25 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200011291810.LAA19425@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer To: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:10:25 +0000 (GMT) Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129104056.0496b420@localhost> from "Brett Glass" at Nov 29, 2000 10:43:29 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 > >But I have to say that I'm not at all surprised about the Linux > >"omission", or the phrasing of the statements about "Caldera > >OpenLinux" and "Do not install a non-supported operating system". > > > >The lawyers have quite a different take: if you want to use GPL > >code, or any other code with a source distribution requirement, > >you are required to attend a "handling toxic waste that will > >destroy your patent rights" class, before you are allowed to even > >touch it. You also have to get "cleared" copies of the code from > >internal IBM servers, so that IBM patents aren't infringed by you > >using a newer version of the code. > > > >There is an 18 page presentation that most of the internal search > >engines will point you to, when you are going through the exercise > >of trying to find information internally. It boils down to "how > >to double-glove before putting on your biohazard suit to enter a > >class 5 hot zone containing live Ebola". > > When IBM acquired Whistle, it acquired a product that included, > and in fact depended upon, GPLed code because FreeBSD does. How > did it handle this situation? Is there any chance that IBM might be > interested in helping to free the BSDs from the GPL? There is a difference between tools dependencies and product dependencies. The InterJet is a closed box, and does not ship with a ful developement environment. The way IBM "handled it" was to do due dilligence on all the code that shipped on the InterJet, and with one procedural snag, vetted it for shipment. The actual thing that gave them the most trouble was PHK's "BeerWare" license, which they finally decided didn't really constitute an obligation, since they could just decide to not like the code or find it useful. One thing they did do was force us to rip out SQUID (GPL), since they believe that SQUID infringes a number of IBM patents. They didn't indicate that they were willing to go after the SQUID people about this (probably as suicidal as USL attempting to mung UC Berkeley, from a pure marketing standpoint), but they were unwilling to ship GPL code which they believed embodied IBM patents, since they believed that doing so would grant license to use the patents royalty free. 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 Nov 29 10:16:17 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 146B437B400; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:16:14 -0800 (PST) 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 LAA28883; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:16:06 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129111306.0498bb60@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:15:45 -0700 To: Terry Lambert From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200011291810.LAA19425@usr08.primenet.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129104056.0496b420@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 11:10 AM 11/29/2000, Terry Lambert wrote: >There is a difference between tools dependencies and product >dependencies. The InterJet is a closed box, and does not >ship with a ful developement environment. What about the many GNU userland utilities -- e.g. grep? Surely some of these are available for administration, debugging, recovery, execution by scripts, etc. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 10:31:42 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 D438537B400; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:31:37 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp05.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA04014; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:32:16 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp05.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAhFa4Th; Wed Nov 29 11:32:03 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA19970; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:31:22 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200011291831.LAA19970@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer To: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:31:22 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129111306.0498bb60@localhost> from "Brett Glass" at Nov 29, 2000 11:15:45 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 > >There is a difference between tools dependencies and product > >dependencies. The InterJet is a closed box, and does not > >ship with a ful developement environment. > > What about the many GNU userland utilities -- e.g. grep? > Surely some of these are available for administration, > debugging, recovery, execution by scripts, etc. 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. FWIW, though: no. These utilities are not available for administration, recovery, or execution of scripts. They are available for debugging, but only to Whistle engineering people (or people who've left, like Archie, Julian, and me, who happen to know the magic incantations and the secret handshake). We all have FreeBSD systems or net access, so we already have source code to these bits. 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. 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 Nov 29 11:16: 4 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 C6A4D37B400; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:15:59 -0800 (PST) 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 MAA29574; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:14:17 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129121021.049b31b0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:14:10 -0700 To: Terry Lambert From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200011291831.LAA19970@usr08.primenet.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129111306.0498bb60@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 11:31 AM 11/29/2000, Terry Lambert wrote: >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. [Snip] >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. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 12:36:38 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from vnode.vmunix.com (vnode.vmunix.com [209.112.4.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6827F37B404 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:36:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix, from userid 1005) id 9F0C7E; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:36:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933BA49A13 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:36:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:36:34 -0500 (EST) From: Chris Coleman To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: BSD to Leapfrog Linux 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 http://daily.daemonnews.org/view_story.php3?story_id=1386 Chris Coleman Daemon News http://www.daemonnews.org Bringing BSD together To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 14:23:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from echunga.lemis.com (freebie.lemis.com [192.109.197.137]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D010C37B400 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 14:22:56 -0800 (PST) Received: (from grog@localhost) by echunga.lemis.com (8.11.1/8.9.3) id eATMEvl52816; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 08:44:57 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from grog) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 08:44:57 +1030 From: Greg Lehey To: Nicholas Basila Cc: Wes Peters , jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads Message-ID: <20001130084457.J48277@echunga.lemis.com> References: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> <20001129154748.A47200@echunga.lemis.com> <3A2536A7.EA05719B@epcot.revenio.com> <3A253B51.758D7AF9@softweyr.com> <3A253C9A.EBD363D7@epcot.revenio.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3A253C9A.EBD363D7@epcot.revenio.com>; from nbasila@epcot.revenio.com on Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 12:27:54PM -0500 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 Wednesday, 29 November 2000 at 12:27:54 -0500, Nicholas Basila wrote: > Wes Peters wrote: > >> Nicholas Basila wrote: >>> >>> I think that IBM ultimately wants to sell these laptops any way they can ... >>> That means with non-MS operating systems. I just wonder how long it will >>> take. >> >> Don't be silly. If they think it will generate more support calls than >> revenue, they will step over us silly BSD users in a heartbeat, chasing >> after the next 50,000-unit corporate sale. > > Ah, but I'd bet that they'd be willing to support RH Linux at some > point. If RH Linux will run on it, FreeBSD probably would, too. Of > course, I know they'd never ever support FreeBSD, but having it work > on these laptops without issues would be good. Red Had Linux runs on these machines. Read the thread: the issue is the partition type. 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 Wed Nov 29 15:37:40 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from grumpy.dyndns.org (cm-24-246-28-166.toney.mediacom.ispchannel.com [24.246.28.166]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B7FB37B402; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:37:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grumpy.dyndns.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eATNbQS59371; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:37:27 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dkelly@grumpy.dyndns.org) Message-Id: <200011292337.eATNbQS59371@grumpy.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Terry Lambert Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG From: David Kelly Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer In-reply-to: Message from Terry Lambert of "Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:10:25 GMT." <200011291810.LAA19425@usr08.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:37:26 -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Terry Lambert writes: [...] > There is a difference between tools dependencies and product > dependencies. The InterJet is a closed box, and does not > ship with a ful developement environment. > > The way IBM "handled it" was to do due dilligence on all the > code that shipped on the InterJet, and with one procedural > snag, vetted it for shipment. > > The actual thing that gave them the most trouble was PHK's > "BeerWare" license, which they finally decided didn't really > constitute an obligation, since they could just decide to > not like the code or find it useful. I read most everything Terry Lambert posts to the FreeBSD lists for his high S/N ratio and for the laughs I get from stuff like the above. :-) Can you imagine trying to explain to an IBM executive that if he/she were to meet PHK they were obliged to buy him a beer? And that it wouldn't go under "entertainment expense account" but under "royalty payments"? Its sure to add an entire viewgraph to the annual Ethics Training. Complete with a picture of PHK so they would know him when they meet him and not be tricked into buying beers for impostors. -- 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 Wed Nov 29 15:47:31 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 30A5237B401; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:47:28 -0800 (PST) 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 QAA02786; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:47:12 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129164606.00cfb220@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:47:06 -0700 To: David Kelly , Terry Lambert From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200011292337.eATNbQS59371@grumpy.dyndns.org> References: <200011291810.LAA19425@usr08.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 04:37 PM 11/29/2000, David Kelly wrote: >Can you imagine trying to explain to an IBM executive that if he/she >were to meet PHK they were obliged to buy him a beer? Hey -- I'm still trying to explain to them that they're obliged to make laptops that work! --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 16:13:14 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtp01.primenet.com (smtp01.primenet.com [206.165.6.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8120737B400; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:13:09 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA24531; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:31:00 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp01.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAqaaaLN; Wed Nov 29 11:21:39 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA19741; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:22:27 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200011291822.LAA19741@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer To: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:22:27 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), /dev/null@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129104503.049744e0@localhost> from "Brett Glass" at Nov 29, 2000 10:47:23 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 > >I think this presumes that the HD is examined at boot time, > >instead of stopping once the system sees a bootable CDROM, > >which is the normal case when doing a recovery. > > If the problem is a BIOS that can't handle a FreeBSD boot > sector, perhaps a special boot sector with replacement hard > disk BIOS code -- such as the one included in OnTrack Disk > Manager -- would serve as a workaround. The problem > could also be that the laptop has a suspend/resume feature > that's looking for a special partition or DOS file and not > finding it. There are a lot of problems with the FreeBSD bootblocks in "Dangerously Dedicated" mode: 1) Causes divide-by-zero because of invalid/unexpected DOS partition table data, predominantly in a number of SCSI controller BIOS'. 2) Doesn't pass all 7 common boot-sector validation tests. 3) Looks like a boot-sector virus to some BIOS'. 4) Partition type 165 is not recognized by the BIOS in some IBM laptops, resulting in a "suspend to disk" overwriting the initial part of the FreeBSD disklabel and "partition" 'a' with suspend data, trashing it. These are just the immediate, and not incidental or consequential problems. The last one is resolved for Linux in recent BIOS by adding the Linux partition number to the exclusion list, along with the Windows and OS/2 exclusions. Technically, this would be better resolved by using an _inclusion_ list, containing only the permissable suspend partition ID. It can also be worked around in FreeBSD by ensuring that the FreeBSD partition is not the first one, and that the DOS partition table is intact, with a FAT/VFAT partition at the start, and the suspend area unadulterated, before the FreeBSD partition in the DOS table. As you note, the OnTrack Disk Manager code does not have the problem (personally, I use Boot Magic, which comes with Partition Magic Pro from Power Quest Software). I even hacked up a little daemon head bitmap so that it shows a deamon as the boot icon image; I've had less luck replacing the background bitmap, but it never struck me as being critical, anyway... 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 Nov 29 16:39:55 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from satan.freebsdsystems.com (satan.freebsdsystems.com [24.69.168.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB45837B400 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:39:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from satan.freebsdsystems.com (satan.freebsdsystems.com [24.69.168.5]) by satan.freebsdsystems.com (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAU0deh48701; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:39:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:39:40 -0500 (EST) From: Lanny Baron To: Jordan Hubbard Cc: Stanislav Posonsky , advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: About The Symbolism (what a joke) In-Reply-To: <70885.974711943@winston.osd.bsdi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Stanislav, Are you related to the priest that sent mail to some list that I happened to pick up whence he (or she) said, that the daemon that FreeBSD has used in its web site or in other places is EVIL??? I wrote the person back. Telling him (or her) to make SURE that the students of his (or her) seminary where not using a specific site for public email, as it is or was, in part, being run with the aid (not aids) of FreeBSD.=20 As far as "impish" goes, our company site uses the BSD Daemon Copyright =A9 1988 by Marshall Kirk McKusick. All Rights Reserved. as it is the reverse or your IMPISH thoughts. Now Stan (or is it satan), why don't you call some of the Internet giants and ask them if they use FreeBSD for any purpose. If you want an article, i am pretty sure you can find it on FreeBSD's web site, in the section "in the press". If you can't email me and I will send you the copy. Other than that, I feel you sent your mail to stir the pot (defecation). Maybe you ought to try a system that uses a penguin for a logo or gif. One thing though, don't try using chio as some distributions associated with the penguin were not "Evil" enough to have it included. I wonder if you (Stan) think the great rock band AC/DC is evil too. Highway to HELL, HELL Aint a Bad Place to Be, are all songs about so called EVIL. Maybe you need a night with Rosie, (whole lotta rosie) in which she (about 100 ft. tall) wears the alluded-to "horns of Satan". Be politically correct. It gets you everywhere, in particular nowhere. --Lanny aka SATAN=20 On Nov 20, 2000, Jordan Hubbard in vogue yet hillarious wrote: >> Can anyone give me an answer to my question why an impish creature is an >> emblem of FreeBSD? > >Please see: http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/daemon.html > >> And concerning the watchword `FreeBSD: The Power to >> Serve`, what power is implied? > >I think you have far too much time on your hands if you're looking >that far into simple slogans for hidden meanings. It means simply >that FreeBSD has the power to serve. Period. > >> peoples! At the same time as an Orthodox believer I cannot and should no= t >> use it because of such an ambiguous (or may be not ambiguous?) symbolis= m. > >That is your choice. No matter how innocuous a slogan or mascot we >chose, however, I'm sure somebody, somewhere, would find the need to >impart additional meaning to their lives by taking offense at it. >It's therefore in this project's best interests to simply ignore >people like that and focus our attention on issues of more significant >importance. > >- Jordan > > >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 Wed Nov 29 19:11:10 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from peorth.iteration.net (peorth.iteration.net [208.190.180.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FBCC37B400 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:11:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by peorth.iteration.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 647715739E; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:11:08 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:11:08 -0600 From: "Michael C . Wu" To: Lanny Baron Cc: Stanislav Posonsky , advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: About The Symbolism (what a joke) Message-ID: <20001129211108.B13092@peorth.iteration.net> Reply-To: "Michael C . Wu" References: <70885.974711943@winston.osd.bsdi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=big5 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from lnb@FreeBSDsystems.COM on Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 07:39:40PM -0500 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 5025 F691 F943 8128 48A8 5025 77CE 29C5 8FA1 2E20 X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x8FA12E20 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Please refrain from doing the following in a public forum: A. Being obnoxious, obtuse, rude, and/or blunt, like what I am doing now B. Calling people "Satan" C. Ordering people to do things D. Telling people to use Linux E. Posting stupid analogies and idiotic sentences filled with ()'s On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 07:39:40PM -0500, Lanny Baron scribbled: | Stanislav, | Are you related to the priest that sent mail to some list that I happened | to pick up whence he (or she) said, that the daemon that FreeBSD has used | in its web site or in other places is EVIL??? | | I wrote the person back. Telling him (or her) to make SURE that the | students of his (or her) seminary where not using a specific site for | public email, as it is or was, in part, being run with the aid (not | aids) of FreeBSD. | | As far as "impish" goes, our company site uses the BSD Daemon Copyright © | 1988 by Marshall Kirk McKusick. All Rights Reserved. as it is | the reverse or your IMPISH thoughts. | | Now Stan (or is it satan), why don't you call some of the Internet giants | and ask them if they use FreeBSD for any purpose. If you want an article, | i am pretty sure you can find it on FreeBSD's web site, in the section "in | the press". If you can't email me and I will send you the copy. | | Other than that, I feel you sent your mail to stir the pot (defecation). | Maybe you ought to try a system that uses a penguin for a logo or gif. One | thing though, don't try using chio as some distributions associated with | the penguin were not "Evil" enough to have it included. | | I wonder if you (Stan) think the great rock band AC/DC is evil | too. Highway to HELL, HELL Aint a Bad Place to Be, are all songs about so | called EVIL. Maybe you need a night with Rosie, (whole lotta rosie) in | which she (about 100 ft. tall) wears the alluded-to "horns of Satan". | | Be politically correct. It gets you everywhere, in particular nowhere. | | --Lanny | aka SATAN -- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | keichii@peorth.iteration.net | keichii@bsdconspiracy.net | | http://peorth.iteration.net/~keichii | Yes, BSD is a conspiracy. | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 21:34:50 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8B5737B400; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:34:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from gte.net (evrtwa1-ar4-144-082.dsl.gtei.net [4.34.144.82]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net with ESMTP ; id XAA55661250 Wed, 29 Nov 2000 23:33:39 -0600 (CST) Received: (from res03db2@localhost) by gte.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA02857; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:34:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from res03db2@gte.net) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:34:11 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Clark Message-Id: <200011300534.VAA02857@gte.net> To: dkelly@hiwaay.net, tlambert@primenet.com Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200011292337.eATNbQS59371@grumpy.dyndns.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I have some vague memory of PHK not being the type to wear t-shirts, but I get a mental picture of him wearing a shirt that reads "If you're from IBM, you owe me a beer.". [RC] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Nov 29 21:41:16 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A137337B400; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:41:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from gte.net (evrtwa1-ar4-144-082.dsl.gtei.net [4.34.144.82]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net with ESMTP ; id XAA71612083 Wed, 29 Nov 2000 23:36:55 -0600 (CST) Received: (from res03db2@localhost) by gte.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA02869; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:40:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from res03db2@gte.net) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:40:39 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Clark Message-Id: <200011300540.VAA02869@gte.net> To: brett@lariat.org, dkelly@hiwaay.net, tlambert@primenet.com Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129164606.00cfb220@localhost> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG If IBM's laptops ship with MS products, the hardware's portion of the failure rate would be lost in the background noise. The real question is why IBM is going after the Intel market with 5L, when Sun has proven that a slow UNIX looks bad when compared with *BSD and Linux. Intel+commercial_UNIX=touch_of_death? [RC] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message 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 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 From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Nov 30 9:54:44 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF4137B400 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 09:53:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=Fools trust ident!) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 141Xvz-0000PL-00; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 10:55:51 -0700 Message-ID: <3A2694A7.F4E3A40C@softweyr.com> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 10:55:51 -0700 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nicholas Basila Cc: Greg Lehey , jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads References: <000701c05958$09651ef0$3103000a@gaston> <20001129154748.A47200@echunga.lemis.com> <3A2536A7.EA05719B@epcot.revenio.com> <3A253B51.758D7AF9@softweyr.com> <3A253C9A.EBD363D7@epcot.revenio.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Nicholas Basila wrote: > > Wes Peters wrote: > > > Nicholas Basila wrote: > > > > > > I think that IBM ultimately wants to sell these laptops any way they can ... > > > That means with non-MS operating systems. I just wonder how long it will > > > take. > > > > Don't be silly. If they think it will generate more support calls than > > revenue, they will step over us silly BSD users in a heartbeat, chasing > > after the next 50,000-unit corporate sale. > > Ah, but I'd bet that they'd be willing to support RH Linux at some point. a) that point is exactly when somebody asks for 50,000 units with RH preinstalled. b) they already support Caldera on a few of these models, and RH on other. IBM refuses to embrace a single Linux vendor, and is spreading the wealth among a variety of distros. > If RH Linux will run on it, FreeBSD probably would, too. As long as we identify the driver changes required to support IBM's bizarre hardware and incorporate features to support them in our code too, yes. > Of course, I know they'd never ever support FreeBSD I certainly don't know that, but I'm probably a lot more patient about these things. > but having it work on these laptops without issues would be good. Just buy a "known good" laptop and be happy. Sony and Dell seem to be the most represented brands at BSDCon, followed by the good models of StinkPad. -- "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 Thu Nov 30 9:58:49 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E592F37B400; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 09:58:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=Fools trust ident!) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 141Y1Y-0000Pg-00; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:01:36 -0700 Message-ID: <3A269600.5037E51C@softweyr.com> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:01:36 -0700 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Glass Cc: Terry Lambert , Mike Smith , Nicholas Basila , jonas.bulow@servicefactory.se, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newerThinkpads References: <200011281658.eASGwoF25493@mass.osd.bsdi.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001129104056.0496b420@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: > > When IBM acquired Whistle, it acquired a product that included, > and in fact depended upon, GPLed code because FreeBSD does. How > did it handle this situation? Is there any chance that IBM might be > interested in helping to free the BSDs from the GPL? The InterJet is *built with* GPL compilers, but does not *incorporate* any GPL code into the product. That is one of the reasons why several of us push back every time somebody wants to stuff GPL code into the base operating system. But I'm preaching to the choir on this point, aren't I Brett? ;^) (mobile trimmed because this doesn't seem to have anything to do with mobile computing anymore.) -- "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 Thu Nov 30 10:13:49 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AB8837B699; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 10:13:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=Fools trust ident!) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 141YFv-0000Pu-00; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:16:27 -0700 Message-ID: <3A26997B.2DA9684@softweyr.com> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:16:27 -0700 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Glass Cc: Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129111306.0498bb60@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20001129121021.049b31b0@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 11:31 AM 11/29/2000, Terry Lambert wrote: > > >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. I'd be concerned about that, too. We've studied the issue and have decided that to put GPLed code in the standard system would be dangerous. It does not appear to be a problem for optional components, so we may use GPL code for elective add-on products. This even drove us to use PostgreSQL rather than MySQL in our product, though MySQL would have been a better fit. I must say I like pgsql a lot better. > 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. Not if they're not in the box. Using my box to it's full potential doesn't require a command line, because it doesn't have one. -- "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 Thu Nov 30 15:16:40 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 B920337B402; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:16:35 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp03.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA27908; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 16:14:24 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr05.primenet.com(206.165.6.205) via SMTP by smtp03.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAOmaWt2; Thu Nov 30 16:14:12 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA24254; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 16:16:11 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200011302316.QAA24254@usr05.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer To: wes@softweyr.com (Wes Peters) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 23:16:11 +0000 (GMT) Cc: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass), tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <3A26997B.2DA9684@softweyr.com> from "Wes Peters" at Nov 30, 2000 11:16:27 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 > I'd be concerned about that, too. We've studied the issue and have decided > that to put GPLed code in the standard system would be dangerous. It does > not appear to be a problem for optional components, so we may use GPL code > for elective add-on products. This even drove us to use PostgreSQL rather > than MySQL in our product, though MySQL would have been a better fit. The pre-GPL license on MySQL was actually incredibly _worse_ than the GPL. > I must say I like pgsql a lot better. I keep meaning to play with this; does it support triggered mutual replication between two hosts running the code? I really want fault tolerance, load balancing, and automatic fail-over (basically, by having the load all move to one machine instead of two [actually more complicated], so that everyone gets degraded service, instead of some number being denied service entirely). I don't have triggers in the code, but I actuall have MySQL set up for mutual replication via log replay, so that the database and its replica stay more or less synchornized. 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 Thu Nov 30 16:11: 7 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 702DC37B401; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 16:11:01 -0800 (PST) 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 RAA14837; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 17:10:47 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001130170310.049eb740@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 17:10:40 -0700 To: Terry Lambert From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200011300548.WAA05850@usr08.primenet.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129121021.049b31b0@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 10:48 PM 11/29/2000, Terry Lambert wrote: >> 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"? In this case, it's infectious in a different way: It is eliminating truly free alternatives. Use it, and you are facilitating another prong of the GPL agenda: to snuff out other options. The fact that FreeBSD does not provide a non-GPLed grep which is BSD-licensed means that the FSF has succeeded. Also, proponents of the GPL are now opting for an expanded requirement based on the notion of "performance for profit." Just running the code in a situation where you made money from it would trigger a requirement to forfeit one's work. >> 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. Ah, but I'm sure that the scripts that run your GUI activate command line utilities behind the scenes -- including, most likely, ones like grep. >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. I'll have to check with Steve Savitzky on this. (He's a strong open source advocate within Ricoh and may have driven this choice.) My guess is that you can get a command line for the purpose of servicing the machine, perhaps via a TTY port inside the case. But that's not the point. Even if YOU can't get the command line, I'll bet their GUI invokes command line utilities. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Nov 30 19:12:18 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 A2CD337B400; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 19:12:09 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp05.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA09978; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:08:54 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr09.primenet.com(206.165.6.209) via SMTP by smtp05.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAzZaizt; Thu Nov 30 20:08:44 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA18343; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:11:55 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200012010311.UAA18343@usr09.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer To: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 03:11:19 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001130170310.049eb740@localhost> from "Brett Glass" at Nov 30, 2000 05:10:40 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 This is getting rat-holed into another "GPL is evil" tirade... > >Only if you link against it. When was the last time you > >linked against "grep"? > > In this case, it's infectious in a different way: It is > eliminating truly free alternatives. Use it, and you are > facilitating another prong of the GPL agenda: to snuff > out other options. The fact that FreeBSD does not provide > a non-GPLed grep which is BSD-licensed means that the FSF > has succeeded. The real "grep" source code is still available; sure it means you have to assemble the parts instead of just taking FreeBSD and running, but be honest: any product based on FreeBSD, or any Open Source code, for that matter, has to be productized before it is really useful. > Also, proponents of the GPL are now opting for an expanded > requirement based on the notion of "performance for profit." > Just running the code in a situation where you made money > from it would trigger a requirement to forfeit one's work. I haven't heard this, and I have reason to doubt it: the MySQL license was this way, and they moved away from that to go with the GPL instead, which dropped the "no commercial use" restrictions, including the performance for profit restriction. > >People who needed access to a command line, and could actually > >use one, were such access granted, were not in our target > >market. > > Ah, but I'm sure that the scripts that run your GUI activate > command line utilities behind the scenes -- including, most > likely, ones like grep. You may be sure, but you're also wrong. 8-). Actually, the UI code on the InterJet is predominantly written in C++, using C++ objects as models for form, frame, table, and other objects. The work was initiated at a time when you could not write HTML code that would result in a consistant user experience across different browsers, and the library used to implement the code is called "libbif" for "Browser Independent Framework". The stuff that's not written that way is writen in C, and the major guts of the system are also in C. I rewrote the mail services subsystem and the agent database management subsystem, to use subschema entries, so mail configuration, mailing lists, users, user capabilities, account information, etc., was all based on a common data modelling system. In fact, the only things that weren't in this model were the legacy code in the system agent, the web publishing, and the scheduling agent (the system agent handled network and other system configuration settings, and was written in C by Archie, while the scheduling code was written by Larry). Even in the startup and shutdown scripts (at least two of which are shell scripts which call grep, but the majority of which are actually special purpose binary programs or wrapped versions of special purpose binary programs, with perl or sh doing the wrapping), there's no GPL infection, since calling something from a shell script is _not_ linking. Even if you were right and the rest of the world were wrong about what constitutes risk in this neighborhood, I'd like to point out an obvious fact that appears to have escaped you... IBM does not sell InterJets, any more than your local cable company sells set-top boxes: IBM sells services. Since an end user does not _buy_ an InterJet, they are not entitled to the source code, even if it was all contaminated: they are not being sold the software. Consider if you were to run a program compilation service, where people submitted code to be compiled, you compiled it with GCC, and sent the object code back to them. You charge for this service, and you've made modifications to GCC to make it more efficient: are your customers entitled to your modifications? No. They are merely _utilizing_ your service. This is the same distinction between "use" and "utilize" that GPL proponents try to obfuscate, only this time it is working against them. Likewise, I could that GCC, modify it, make a compiler that generates vastly superior code, use it to compile the stock GCC, get a compiler that compiles the same unimproved code as the stock GCC... but does so three times faster. I now sell binaries of this new compiler, and give away the source code: after all, it's nothing more than the stock GCC source code. I don't have to give away my modified compiler source code at all, any more than I have to give away the source code to the DEC/Compaq Alpha compiler when I compile GCC using it and get a faster, tighter GCC binary as a result. So much for any "performance for profit" clause which might come along later being worked around. Until and unless the entire software industry moves to the new model, _any_ new model can be worked around, within the scope of it having to be able to coexist with the current model for it to be able to get anywhere. > >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. > > I'll have to check with Steve Savitzky on this. (He's a > strong open source advocate within Ricoh and may have > driven this choice.) My guess is that you can get a > command line for the purpose of servicing the machine, > perhaps via a TTY port inside the case. But that's not > the point. Even if YOU can't get the command line, > I'll bet their GUI invokes command line utilities. Doubtful. CGIs are underpowered, and scripted CGIs will always lose out, performance-wise, to compiled code. If you are right, then someone is just going to build the same product, throw out the scripting, and take their market away from them, based on higher performance on equivalent CPU cycles, or the same performance on lower cost hardware with lesser CPU cycles. Binary always beats scripts on everything but prototyping. Scripts are not a good idea for deployment, since they are fragile in the face of system upgrades and other changes which might change the underlying components implementing their functionality (e.g.: grep), and since it is almost impossible to do formal verification against a script: you'd have to verify every system comonent with which the script interacted, and then you'd have to invent a formal validation tool for sh or perl, which while not quite an NP-incomplete problem, would be close enough for the amount of time remaining before your product is obsolete. 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 Thu Nov 30 21:46:50 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7196037B401; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 21:46:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=Fools trust ident!) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 141j45-00006A-00; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 22:48:57 -0700 Message-ID: <3A273BC9.871DDF66@softweyr.com> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 22:48:57 -0700 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Terry Lambert Cc: Brett Glass , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer References: <200011302316.QAA24254@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: > > > I'd be concerned about that, too. We've studied the issue and have decided > > that to put GPLed code in the standard system would be dangerous. It does > > not appear to be a problem for optional components, so we may use GPL code > > for elective add-on products. This even drove us to use PostgreSQL rather > > than MySQL in our product, though MySQL would have been a better fit. > > The pre-GPL license on MySQL was actually incredibly _worse_ > than the GPL. > > > I must say I like pgsql a lot better. > > I keep meaning to play with this; does it support triggered > mutual replication between two hosts running the code? I It does support triggers, but I don't think it does replication. > really want fault tolerance, load balancing, and automatic > fail-over (basically, by having the load all move to one > machine instead of two [actually more complicated], so that > everyone gets degraded service, instead of some number being > denied service entirely). You might be able to do some interesting tricks with the commit code for the generational mechanism. In PostgreSQL 7, there is a finite point in time where every commit moves from a "new generation" record to being fully integrated with the main data store; this might be an excellent time to replicate the last phase of the commit across replicated servers. > I don't have triggers in the code, but I actuall have MySQL > set up for mutual replication via log replay, so that the > database and its replica stay more or less synchornized. What sort of replay interval do you use -- more or less continuously? I find MySQL to be unstable and rather toy-like compared to PG, which I've not had a single problem with yet. The enumeration types in MySQL are missed, 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 Thu Nov 30 21:56:18 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from homer.softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A6A937B400; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 21:56:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=softweyr.com ident=Fools trust ident!) by homer.softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 141jBe-00006V-00; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 22:56:46 -0700 Message-ID: <3A273D9E.E7EEF499@softweyr.com> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 22:56:46 -0700 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Clark Cc: dkelly@hiwaay.net, tlambert@primenet.com, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, phk@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer References: <200011300534.VAA02857@gte.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Robert Clark wrote: > > I have some vague memory of PHK not being the type to wear t-shirts, but I > get a mental picture of him wearing a shirt that reads "If you're from IBM, > you owe me a beer.". A really nice sweater with the legend worked into the knit. -- "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 Thu Nov 30 22:48: 3 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 AB24137B400; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 22:47:55 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA28748; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 23:44:01 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAEtaO63; Thu Nov 30 23:43:49 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA09204; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 23:47:36 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200012010647.XAA09204@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer To: wes@softweyr.com (Wes Peters) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 06:47:35 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass), freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <3A273BC9.871DDF66@softweyr.com> from "Wes Peters" at Nov 30, 2000 10:48:57 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 [ ... postgres doesn't support replication ... ] Too bad; it's a requirement for my application. 8-(. > > I don't have triggers in the code, but I actuall have MySQL > > set up for mutual replication via log replay, so that the > > database and its replica stay more or less synchornized. > > What sort of replay interval do you use -- more or less continuously? Yes. It will effectively check every few minutes, and replicate data not involved in an active session. An active session will, by definition, have data private from all other sessions, and it is this data that I'm interested in replicating (and only this data). If I had a trigger, I could delay the response to the client until after the trigger had notified the replicas to replicate, and they had done so (still have the problem of a downed server, though). > I find MySQL to be unstable and rather toy-like compared to PG, > which I've not had a single problem with yet. The enumeration > types in MySQL are missed, though. Other than having to become the defacto AIX port maintainer to use it on AIX and have any real chance of being able to upgrade and have the next version work, I don't really have a problem with MySQL (at least technically; I dislike its new license as much as its old, but it's tactical, not strategic, so I don't care that much). The biggest problem is new data creates, and that's handled by assigning record numbers partially based on a common space, and partially on a reserved per server space. This lets me create records without an inter-server interlock, since I know all records created in one server will be prefixed with one 8-bit value, and all records in the second server will have a different 8-bit value. Obviously, these values are externally configured, rather than being in the database. 8-) 8-). The delete replication problem is more ugly; if I get a server that is not the same as my previous server, and I deleted on a previous server, then when I iterate "my" records, I will see deleted records "reappear" until the delete is replicated. This problem also exists to a lesser extent in other data change operations. Creates are really not a problem, since connecting to server B, after a create on server A, before replication to B, means that the unreplicated data object is still "on its way" to server B. Since I have a data object propagation delay from external store and forward processing to get into A in the first place, I can treat the data as "on its way" with no ill effects. The round-trip from a client back to the same client also has a latency, so even if a client sends a data object to itself, a delay in propagation to the "slave" (all servers not getting the data first are effectively "slaves") just looks like normal latency. I can maintain "synchronized/unsynchronized" state in an external directory (I have an LDAP directory specifically for this type of state information), but I have to modify LDAP replication to have an "active listener list" off the master for this to be efficient (the interval is like the TTL on an SOA update on a DNS sever with notifications turned on, when using a stealth primary, and doing DNSUPDAT against the primary, but reading from the secondary; I basically have to implement "notifications" for LDAP). With this information in hand, I could support an "unsynchronized" DN that I would use, if present, to bind to the up to date server, instead of attempting to load-balance. I'm at a loss as to what to do about the case of a delete-unsynchronized-crash, since it means that I can't use the replica until its synchronized. I have the same problem with new data on the way in, since I want to write it to the "most current" server (obviously), so I would have to seperately queue that data until it could be delivered (ugh). I would also be introducing a single point of failure, since like DNS, the relationship between LDAP replicas is also "master/slaves", so if the master goes down, an attempt to change data in a slave would result in a referral to the master, and the master is down. I _could_ define all unprocessable updates as "in progress", but then the "most recent" state tracking becomes queued, as well, so I couldn't permit deletes/changes until after propagation. Getting sick yet? 8-) 8-| 8-( 8-P 8-O... Anyway, it's an interesting problem. Not storing volatile state in the directory, I'm currently sitting at a single point of failure only on the servers which serve the data, since I have to marry the client to a particular server, and keep a hot spare standing by on the otherside of a dual ported RAID array (ugly, but it works; I supose I could use AFS, as well, but CODA doesn't cut it, and neither does NFS). Hope you're having as much fun in your project. }B-). 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 Fri Dec 1 2:14:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from morpheus.skynet.be (morpheus.skynet.be [195.238.2.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0D1937B401; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 02:14:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [195.238.1.121] (brad.techos.skynet.be [195.238.1.121]) by morpheus.skynet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1911DDEB; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:14:31 +0100 (MET) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: blk@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200012010311.UAA18343@usr09.primenet.com> References: <200012010311.UAA18343@usr09.primenet.com> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 10:37:13 +0100 To: Terry Lambert , brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass) From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-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 3:11 AM +0000 2000/12/1, Terry Lambert wrote: > IBM does not sell InterJets, any more than your local cable > company sells set-top boxes: IBM sells services. Since an > end user does not _buy_ an InterJet, they are not entitled to > the source code, even if it was all contaminated: they are > not being sold the software. Right. This is one of the key reasons why I never considered getting an InterJet. If someone *sold* a BSD-based device that is otherwise identical to this, I would have bought one in a nanosecond, but I don't want to buy a Linux-based Qube, nor do I want to shackle myself forever to a service provider. Everyone is getting into the "give away a piece of hardware that does something that used to be free and sell the services" business model, but not everyone is buying it. I'm not going to pay TiVo $$$ per month to take an electronic TV schedule (the contents of which are printed for "free" in newspapers and magazines around the world) and then have a computer digitally record the stuff I want to watch. If someone wants to *sell* me the box that does this via other services that are already available (via broadcast during the vertical blanking interval on PBS stations, etc...), I'll be more than happy to spend lots of extra money to get that, but I simply refuse to shackle myself to buying a set of services for the rest of my life. -- These are my opinions -- not to be taken as official Skynet policy ====================================================================== Brad Knowles, || Belgacom Skynet SA/NV Systems Architect, Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin || Rue Colonel Bourg, 124 Phone/Fax: +32-2-706.13.11/12.49 || B-1140 Brussels http://www.skynet.be || Belgium "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Dec 1 3:56:25 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 5609B37B400; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 03:56:17 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp05.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA14188; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 04:53:00 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr01.primenet.com(206.165.6.201) via SMTP by smtp05.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAinaiSB; Fri Dec 1 04:52:55 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr01.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA22945; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 04:56:08 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200012011156.EAA22945@usr01.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer To: blk@skynet.be (Brad Knowles) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:55:52 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Brad Knowles" at Dec 01, 2000 10:37:13 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 > > IBM does not sell InterJets, any more than your local cable > > company sells set-top boxes: IBM sells services. Since an > > end user does not _buy_ an InterJet, they are not entitled to > > the source code, even if it was all contaminated: they are > > not being sold the software. > > Right. This is one of the key reasons why I never considered > getting an InterJet. If someone *sold* a BSD-based device that is > otherwise identical to this, I would have bought one in a nanosecond, > but I don't want to buy a Linux-based Qube, nor do I want to shackle > myself forever to a service provider. Whistle sold InterJets; you could have bought one then. There is even an aftermarket for setting a root password, adding more disk, adding more RAM, and adding additional connectivity options, like a faster modem (if you have the old box). As far as the Cobalt stuff goes, NetBSD runs on the x86 RAQ and Qube things, so getting FreeBSD going would probably be trivial, if someone hasn't done it already. > Everyone is getting into the "give away a piece of hardware that > does something that used to be free and sell the services" business > model, but not everyone is buying it. FWIW: I agree that this model is fundamentally flawed; I think the current dearth of funding for the ASP boondoggle and the crashes left and right of the companies trying this model are good indicators that it's not a long-term win. That said, it's my opinion that IBM could sell InterJets with little risk, if they wanted to (you can buy a Cobalt box through REQCAT, the IBM internal purchasing facility, but not an InterJet). IMO, there are other revenue models that _will_ work; I have an outsourced service I've been working on, and I've identified 7 revenue models, only 3 of which are traditional, and only 1 of which smacks of an ASP (I'm willing to commit to trying it, even knowing in my heart that it'll fail, to get V.C. buy-in, after which I'll convert to one or more of the others before letting the mandate burn enough capitol to hurt me, since I know at least two of them are killer models for that type of service; I would find this route disingenuous enough that it'd be very distasteful for me. I rather think I can find a V.C. with brains or at least a healthy fear of ASP models these days, anyway). > I'm not going to pay TiVo $$$ per month to take an electronic TV > schedule (the contents of which are printed for "free" in newspapers > and magazines around the world) and then have a computer digitally > record the stuff I want to watch. This is my problem with the so-called "Internet appliances" that make you sign up for service from a particular provider, and then deeply "discount" the hardware -- actually not giving a discount at all, but instead amortizing the cost over the service contract lifetime. The companies that are selling these things, and then bitching about people hacking them (because people want cool hardware, and are willing to pay to play with it, if they are early adopters) are missing the whole point. I'll state this as fact: It's the applications that your customers apply your product to _in spite of you_ that will be "_the killer app_" for your product, not all of the nice little corrals you've assembled in your stockyard to guide them into your preferred revenue pens. Or to make it short... sell what people want to buy, _not_ what you want to sell. Or a little longer.. to _hell_ with what you intended for your product, if your customer wants to use your nifty multifunction wrench as a hammer, then you should probably make a decision as to the relative size of the multifunction wrench and hammer markets. Once you do that, you get to decide whether you want to sell both hammers and multifunction wrenches, add a hammer head to the end of your multifunction wrench, or say "to hell with it! I'm a hammer manufacturer! Print up new business cards!". > If someone wants to *sell* me the box that does this via other > services that are already available (via broadcast during the > vertical blanking interval on PBS stations, etc...), I'll be more > than happy to spend lots of extra money to get that, but I simply > refuse to shackle myself to buying a set of services for the rest of > my life. Broadcasting the information you need, or offering it for free through any internet connection that they already have would turn the box into both a high demand item and a commodity over night. I tend to think that broadcast would be more viable (less moving parts to hook together the hard way), but you'd have to lose a lot of your window through the standardization needed to get the buy-in. Your margins would go from 30-40%, down to 6%, as other people built boxes to use the same info. You might be able to get away with this if the lifecycle of the product was guaranteed to be 3 years or less, by offering the service part toll free. Actually, I think the timing window on this will open in 2002, given the conversion schedule for digital broadcast (at least in the U.S.). If you could get the local broadcaster to provide the programming data as part of their signal, then 6% is OK, if you expect a lifetime of 3 years or more, since it all averages out. You'll just have to content yourself with being a Walmart instead of a Woolworth's (yeah, hard decision, that). If you could build brand, then you could probably charge a premium for being a premium product, in peoples minds, whether or not in reality. Put another way: do you see a lot of VCR+ codes being published in your local television guides, or the hardware for it out there? How successful was DIVX? Pushing standards is not cheap, and tends to benefit your competition as much as you, unless you are prepared to execute on a dime; most sane standards are only tactical. Attempts to make standards into something strategic is usually not sane, unless you already have a monopoly. 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 Fri Dec 1 4:31:34 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from morpheus.skynet.be (morpheus.skynet.be [195.238.2.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B667D37B400; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 04:31:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from [195.238.1.121] (brad.techos.skynet.be [195.238.1.121]) by morpheus.skynet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id C664CDCBE; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 13:31:21 +0100 (MET) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: blk@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200012011156.EAA22945@usr01.primenet.com> References: <200012011156.EAA22945@usr01.primenet.com> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 13:31:17 +0100 To: Terry Lambert From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-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 11:55 AM +0000 2000/12/1, Terry Lambert wrote: > Whistle sold InterJets; you could have bought one then. Sadly, I didn't find out about them until the announcement that IBM was buying the company, and didn't think that the business model would be changing, so I didn't race around trying to scrape up the cash to buy one on the spur of the moment. > As far as the Cobalt stuff goes, NetBSD runs on the x86 RAQ and > Qube things, so getting FreeBSD going would probably be trivial, > if someone hasn't done it already. I'd be interested in hearing more about this, if anyone has any information. > Put another way: do you see a lot of VCR+ codes being published > in your local television guides, or the hardware for it out > there? I'm not in the US anymore, so I can't say whether VCR+ still has any penetration. I know that, as of the time I left (a couple of years ago), they were still in wide use, and had been for a number of years. IIRC, virtually all VCRs sold had this feature. > How successful was DIVX? Thankfully, it died very quickly. However, because of it, I will never again buy anything at Circuit City. -- These are my opinions -- not to be taken as official Skynet policy ====================================================================== Brad Knowles, || Belgacom Skynet SA/NV Systems Architect, Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin || Rue Colonel Bourg, 124 Phone/Fax: +32-2-706.13.11/12.49 || B-1140 Brussels http://www.skynet.be || Belgium "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Dec 1 4:40:50 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 2AB5637B400; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 04:40:46 -0800 (PST) Received: (from mwlucas@localhost) by blackhelicopters.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA45367; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 07:40:29 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mwlucas) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 07:40:29 -0500 From: Michael Lucas To: Brett Glass Cc: Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Message-ID: <20001201074029.A45298@blackhelicopters.org> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129121021.049b31b0@localhost> <200011300548.WAA05850@usr08.primenet.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001130170310.049eb740@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001130170310.049eb740@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 05:10:40PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 05:10:40PM -0700, Brett Glass wrote: > >Only if you link against it. When was the last time you > >linked against "grep"? > In this case, it's infectious in a different way: It is > eliminating truly free alternatives. Use it, and you are > facilitating another prong of the GPL agenda: to snuff > out other options. The fact that FreeBSD does not provide > a non-GPLed grep which is BSD-licensed means that the FSF > has succeeded. /usr/ports/text/freegrep Not up to speed yet, but I bet the author would love patches. -- Michael Lucas mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org http://www.blackhelicopters.org/~mwlucas/ Big Scary Daemons: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/q/Big_Scary_Daemons To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Dec 1 11:27: 1 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from dnull.com (dnull.com [209.133.53.79]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B837237B400 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:26:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from jigsaw.svbug.com (mg131-036.ricochet.net [204.179.131.36]) by dnull.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA90807; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:26:56 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200012011926.LAA90807@dnull.com> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:25:24 -0800 (PST) From: jessem@livecam.com Reply-To: jessemonroy@email.com Subject: Fwd: BSD context; wireless To: advocacy@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG URL: http://www.upside.com/texis/mvm/open_season?id=3a26ad1a2 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Dec 1 15:39:38 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1EC6637B6BC for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 15:24:26 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 73874 invoked by uid 100); 1 Dec 2000 23:24:25 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <14888.13097.187777.80105@guru.mired.org> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:24:25 -0600 (CST) To: "xavian anderson macpherson" Cc: "Mike Meyer" , , , , , Subject: Re: installing freebsd from windows nt without using boot disks In-Reply-To: <004b01c05bec$a79cbb50$40461418@salem1.or.home.com> References: <14887.12057.451329.642265@guru.mired.org> <004b01c05bec$a79cbb50$40461418@salem1.or.home.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 10) "Capitol Reef" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ X-Message: You should get a better mailer. Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG So go whine at the people you gave the $60 to, not the *volunteers* who are on the -questions list. You might as well drop me from the CC list - the only whining children I have to deal with are mine; except they've grown past acting like you do. Once I read the claim that you paid for the right, I stopped reading. =09 types: > i paid for the right to whine! i still have a $60 box of software th= at is > nothing more than a doorstop. ironically, the only way that i may be = able to > use the software on the freebsd cd's, is to buy a MICROSOFT PRODUCT a= ka > INTERIX. THE ONLY REDEMPTION YOU HAVE NOW IS TO WRITE A FREEBSD KERN= EL THAT > FUNCTIONS AS A DLL OR EXE IN WINDOWS! if you can make all of the sta= bility > features of freebsd portable to windows, such that freebsd becomes a = package > that windows users can add-on to their existing platform, to function= in the > same way as the ANTICRASH and other utilities that i have running on = my > system, then you may have some sort of redemption in terms of a futur= e. but > based on what i have included in this email below, freebsd and everyo= ne elso > too) has a very limited term of existance in the face of increasing > MICROSOFT encroachment into unix interoperability. UNIX WILL BECOME = A > UTILITY FOR WINDOWS. think i'm crazy? read (the third paragrph) bel= ow! > THE ONLY THING THAT PREVENTED MICROSOFT FROM HAVING ABSOLUTE DOMINANC= E > BEFORE, WAS IT'S LACK OF A VIABLE UNIX IMPLEMENTATION. even APPLE co= mputer > now has a linux platform. when MICROSOFT does with linux what freebs= d did, > and allows linux to run in windows NT/2000, linux and unix will fall = under > the single auspices of MICROSOFT. whether that will be functionally = true or > not is irrelevant. MICROSOFT ONLY HAS TO CREATE THE IMPRESSION OR > APPEARANCE OF COMPLETE INTEROPERABILITY. ONCE MICROSOFT HAS NEGATED = THE > ARGUEMENT OF WINDOWS VS UNIX (BY PORTING UNIX TO WINDOWS) THERE WILL > NOLONGER BE ANY ATTENTION PAID TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN WINDOWS. IT WA= S A > HEROIC ATTEMPT AT THE PRESIDENCY, BUT MICROSOFT CONTROLS THE ELECTION= ! IT'S > OVER!! >=20 > [this paragraph was written before i added everything about INTERIX i= n the > paragraph above. i only leave this here as history, as freebsd will = shortly > become. MS INTERIX may answer all of the questions and aspirations i= > previously had.] THE QUESTION WAS, WHEN WILL IT BE POSSIBLE TO INSTA= LL > FREEBSD FROM WINDOWS NT WITHOUT HAVING TO USE BOOT DISKS TO DO SO. I= GEUSS > YOU DIDN'T READ THE SUBJECT LINE OF THE EMAIL. I THINK THAT IS WHAT = IT (THE > SUBJECTLINE) IS FOR. IT STATED VERY CLEARLY THE INTENT, PURPOSE AND > QUESTION POSED BY THE EMAIL. i geuss i was wrong to believe the adve= rtising > on the box. i had no reason, based on what was purported in the the > statement of `professional quality', `for serious internet users', et= c.to > mean that freebsd would offer a LOWER LEVEL OF COMPATABLITY than the = linux > systems i had previously used. i brought freebsd because i thought i= t would > give me the level of interoperabilty that i wanted. what i wanted wa= s a > single OSystem that would run linux and unix on one single platform. = the > sad fact is that even if i did get it running, i still wouldn't have = use of > my cdrom or the scsi disk which i had previously used with both linux= > versions (and now NT as well) for the exclusive purpose of virtual me= mory > space. i am not about to go out and buy a new scsi controller to mak= e-up > for the shortcomings of one operating system. freebsd was supposed t= o have > been around longer than linux. why then is it deficient in the area = of > drivers for ancient equipment that were clearly around before linux e= ven > existed? this is really not an issue of age or maturity regarding a= > specific OS. it is a matter of intent. linux strove for universalit= y from > it's inception. maybe i am way off base. i am often wrong. but i d= o know > that i wanted a single OS that would handle unix and linux. (I HAD N= O > DESIRE TO GO BACK TO WINDOWS!!) SINGLE SYSTEM INTEROPERABLITY is wha= t > freebsd claimed to do. that is why i brought it. i thought i would = not be > without ANY of the functionality i came to expect from linux. freebs= d did > not deliver on the satisfaction of my expectations which were in fact= > reasonable, based on the statements i read on the box. superior is j= ust > that, SUPERIOR! it is a term of absolutes. it is was also further c= laimed > in the 800 page handbook (which was my main reason for buying the > power-pak), that freebsd had a higher level of developement than linu= x and > was therefore more stable as a result. (based on these claims, why s= hould i > have expected to not be able to use the equipemnt i was already using= in > linux?) i had no reason to think that freebsd was in being selective= in > it's statements of superiority. that box should have had a big asteR= ISK! on > it. with more emphasis on RISK! as in buy at your own RISK!; the > statements made herein do not reflect the qualitites purported to be = true. >=20 > now, while you gloat at the apparent triumph the unix community may t= hink it > gained by MS buying INTERIX and now including it as part of the windo= ws > environment, IT IS NOT A TRIUMPH. the bottomline is that MS is not a= bout to > go away. YOU CAN THINK OF THIS MICROSOFT ACQUISITION AS THE ANT OR W= ASP (i > forget which does what to whom) THAT LAYS IT'S EGGS IN THE BODY OF TH= E > OTHER, ONLY TO HAVE IT'S LARVAE EAT IT'S HOST FROM THE INSIDE OUT!! = they > will never forfeit their dominance on the computing community, no mat= ter how > infantile you may think their systems are. MS will eat you from the= inside > out. as i stated in another email, MS can integrate any opensource = unix > (and/or linux) into the windows environment it wants to. and it will= . it > (MS) has already stated that they are going include INTERIX into the > SERVICES FOR UNIX in future releases. when MS completely integrates = unix > (INTERIX) into windows 2000, so that any unix application can run on = that > (win2000) platform, without having a separate unix kernel to provide = that > functionality, NOONE WILL WRITE UNIX APPLICATIONS FOR ANYTHING ELSE T= HAN > WHAT MICROSOFT DECLARES IS THE LEGITIMATE UNIX ENVIRONMENT FOR WINDOW= S (AND > HENCE THE WORLD)! microsoft has the power to make such a pronounceme= nt for > all the world to follow. and once said, the world will do just that,= > FOLLOW! including you! >=20 > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/zipdocs/interix_technotes.exe t= his is > the link for all the documentation regarding the functionaslity of IN= TERIX > in the windows environment. of course you need windows to read it. s= o for > those of you who don't have windows, i'll download and extract it, an= d > repackage it as a zip file to attach to this email. even if you don'= t use > windows at all, it makes sense to know what MICROSOFT intends to do w= ith the > unix community. CANNABALISM couldn't be better! >=20 > "Interix 2.2 is a perfect complement to our current UNIX interoperabi= lity > solution, and in the future, we plan to combine this functionality wi= th > Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX into one comprehensive UNIX appli= cation > migration and interoperability solution." DO YOU SEE THE WRITING ON= THE > WALL? >=20 > ANY CLAIM THAT YOU MAKE AGAINST THE LEGITIMACY OF RUNNING UNIX IN WIN= DOWS, > CAN BE EQUALLY MADE AGAINST RUNNING LINUX IN FREEBSD. WHAT JUSTIFIES= ONE > JUSTIFIES THE OTHER!! Microsoft may get it wrong to start out with, = but > that won't be the case for long. they want absolute domination. and= they > will do whatever it takes to do that. INTERIX is the "shot across th= e bow" > of the unix community. it serves to give notice of the MS agenda to = usurp > any legitimacy of unix as their own. when (previously unix) develope= rs > realize that they have the absolute standard of windows on which to b= uild > their packages, all further unix developement will be windows unix (a= s > defined only by MICROSOFT) developement. it will nolonger be a matte= r of > which version of unix is superior to another. that question will be = MOOT. > it will be as it has always been, a question of profitability and exp= ense. > NO, I DON'T REALLU LIKE THE IDEA OF ONLY HAVING MICROSOFT CONTROLLING= > EVERYTHING. but there are plenty of things in this life that i don't= > particularly like. and my or your disliking the reality of the world= in > which we live, does not change that world. only intelligent directed= action > will do that. my statement about writing the freebsd kernel as a win= dows > dll or exe mayseem reprehensible to you, but ultimately your survival= will > depend on that very act of infiltration. you cannot stop the INEVITA= BILITY > of MICROSOFT porting unix into windows NT/2000. that is clearly thei= r > intent. noone is going to want to write unix apllications that don't= > conform to any standards that MICROSOFT imposes by the dictates of th= eir > massive dominance. >=20 > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/default.asp > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp > http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2000/Feb00/InterixPR.asp >=20 > "Interix provided all of the UNIX functionality necessary to efficien= tly > move the code to Windows NT," Klinect said. "One of the key advantage= s was > that the code ported to Interix could still be deployed on the IRS' l= egacy > UNIX systems during its transition to Windows NT, maintaining the req= uired > 24x7 full functionality for this mission-critical application." >=20 > Interix 2.2 eases the migration of existing UNIX applications and scr= ipts by > providing a robust, high-performance environment for running such > applications. It allows users with UNIX environments to take advantag= e of > the benefits of the Windows environment without having to rewrite cri= tical > applications. In addition, users can immediately use the full Windows= -based > application development environment to develop native Win32=AE API-ba= sed > applications. Interix 2.2 provides over 300 utilities and tools and i= s fully > integrated with the Windows desktop, security model and file system. = Interix > 2.2 is a native subsystem to Windows, providing the highest performan= ce for > running UNIX applications. The Interix 2.2 Software Development Kit, = which > is included with Interix 2.2, supports over 1,900 UNIX APIs and helps= ease > migration of existing UNIX applications to the Interix environment. >=20 > Interix 2.2 provides UNIX users with a familiar environment and set o= f tools > to leverage their existing UNIX expertise. For example, the tools and= > utilities behave exactly as they would on other UNIX systems while > preserving the look and feel of UNIX applications, which eliminates t= he need > to retrain users. Interix 2.2 also provides extensive scripting suppo= rt and > enables users to maintain the use of common scripting languages and t= ools. >=20 > >=20 > Interix 2.2 brings Microsoft customers one step closer to its vision = of a > single desktop computer for all uses by providing a complete enterpri= se > platform to run all Windows-based, UNIX and Internet applications. In= terix > 2.2 also helps simplify the administration of heterogeneous environme= nts by > providing UNIX system administrators with access to Windows-based sys= tems > using familiar tools and management strategies, thus reducing system > administration and total cost of ownership. Interix 2.2 also provides= system > administrators with a familiar set of remote administration tools and= batch > support, enabling efficient system administration. >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Meyer" > To: "xavian anderson macpherson" > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 8:54 PM > Subject: Re: installing freebsd from windows nt without using boot di= sks >=20 >=20 > > I hope you enjoyed writing your troll. I only wish you had been mat= ure > > enough to post it to the correct list, or not to post it at all. Th= is > > is QUESTIONS@freebsd.org. You didn't ask any. Since your message wa= s > > nothing but opinion and ranting, it should have gone to > > ADVOCACY@freebsd.org. > > > > If you don't like FreeBSD because it won't do what you want, either= > > don't use, or fix it. If you don't have the expertise to fix it, > > either hire someone, or ask politely. Coming off like a whining > > preschooler won't get you help, it'll just make people mad at you. > > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > this is an updated version of the letter previously sent. >=20 > ORIGINAL MESSAGE > xavian anderson macpherson > http://www.professional3d.com >=20 > i purchased freebsd about two months ago. i have not yet been able t= o get > it to run. i went through the trouble and expense of buying the powe= r-pak > 4.0 so that i would have the 800 page handbook. (i wanted freebsd be= cause i > thought it would be the last system i would ever need to buy.) i als= o > wanted the full 10-cd collection of software. the fact of the matter= is > that the cd's were worthless to me because freebsd would not recogniz= e my > multifunction soundcard as a valid scsi device; which by the way, bo= th > versions of linux (suse and mandrake) and windows nt were able to use= > without any difficulty whatsoever. i have found the repeated claims = of > freebsd superiority to be a bunch of crap! >=20 > i have absolutely no idea how something so superior to windows and li= nux is > unable to recognize the presense of my adaptec aha152x scsi adaptor o= n my > soundblaster 16 card. maybe it's too beneath freebsd to recognize my= lowly > implementation of scsi. i knew that freebsd claimed to be mature; ma= ybe > poor vision is also the side-effect of this protracted maturity. eit= her > that or this maturity has imbued you with yet another ailment common = to > advancing age. that ailment is arrogance. that seems to be the onl= y > explanation for this; as the common response that i have received fr= om many > but not all, has been one of arrogance and contempt that i would dare= to > question the godlike qualities of freebsd. so let me make it persona= l. > there is no problem with my scsi card. i have had three working oper= ating > system to prove it. the problem is with the software (and it's devel= opers) > that freebsd uses. now you may like to claim that linux is a develop= er > system. but the fact is, that those (infantile) developers seem to b= e doing > a much (indisputably) better job of handling the developement of driv= ers > than freebsd. >=20 > i was forced to use the ftp server as my source of installation; nega= ting > the very purpose for which i purchased the power-pak (as everything t= hat is > in the power-pak can be had on the net). after installing the system= from > the net, it ran just long enough for me to try to install the XFREE86= 4.0, > which then made my system inoperable. after that i was never able to= get it > to run again. quite some time later after all of this, i tried to cr= eate > bootdisks for the latest version of freebsd. when i went to reboot m= y > system with these new disks, the system said that there was no kernel= on the > floppies. you make sense of it. i created the disks using a command= line > instruction within NT. the first disks that i made were done with li= nux. > as i nolonger have a running linux system, i cannot revert to it to m= ake the > bootdisks for freebsd. so either i have a freebsd installation syste= m which > runs from NT without rebooting, or it's unusable. i mean let's get = real. > if linux can (and does) allow for it (linux) to be run on a windows (= not NT) > formatted disk, what the hell is the reason that freebsd can't do the= same > and better (as you so fraudulently claim). and don't tell me how poo= r of a > solution the UMSDOS is. certainly if freebsd is so advanced, there i= s no > excuse for there not being an even better system available from freeb= sd; and > especially for NT. since NT is the highend of the windows system, it= only > makes sense that freebsd should be directed towards providing REAL SO= LUTIONS > for NT. i don't want to hear excuses. I WANT RESULTS! >=20 > NT has something that the standard UFS does not have. it has an inte= grated > compressed filesystem. with it, i have increased my storage space by= no > less than 35%. if you had the same feature, i would have 5GB's of > effective space instead of only 3.7GB's available for freebsd. but a= t this > point in time, i am not willing to install freebsd until the aforemen= tion > criteria are met. if someone knows of a single package that i can in= stall > on my existing NT platform, that will allow for the seemless operatio= n of > unix programs as though they were native windows applications, i for = one > would like to hear about it. i just went to the windows site and fou= nd > something they call WINDOWS SERVICES FOR UNIX 2.0. i don't know how = long it > had been around or how good it is. i found it by simply typing `wind= owsnt > unix' into my browsers address bar to get a search on those keywords.= >=20 > http://shop.microsoft.com/Products/Products_Feed/Online/WindowsServic= esforUN > IX[759]/ProductOverview.asp >=20 > i just found what may be the very thing i was asking for. after writ= ing the > above paragraph, i went back to the link above and did further readin= g. i > came across something called INTERIX. so once again i did a net sear= ch and > came up with a site that sells it. in reading, i found that it is no= w a MS > unix-product. it seems to provide the unix components to windows NT = class > environments. i will do more reseach on this. and if i find it to b= e > usable, i'll buy it. putting an end to any further questions about f= reebsd > or any other variant of unix or linux. let's face it, MS is in a muc= h > better position to employ unix components such as freebsd than the re= verse. > you might as well look at the writing on the wall. the very openness= that > allows anyone to use freebsd and linux source code, allows MS to add = it to > their own systems without anyone having any right to complain about i= t. as > long as MS uses an open source version of unix, they could do anythin= g they > want to integrate it into the existing windows environment. and all = that > any of you can do is sit back and wipe your eyes. WHIMPER WHIMPER WH= IMPER!! > you have basically written your own obituarary. because windows can = freely > integrate open source systems, but the same is not true of the open s= ource > community. hence there will ultimately be no justification for your > existance. you will be relegated to the status of footnote; and fran= kly the > sooner the better. the system that MS ultimately chooses for their > integrated environment, will become the status quo. if you thought t= hat > windows was dominant before, wait until they put unix interoperabilit= y into > the windows NT/2000 framework. your only choice is to set the lead, = by > beating MS to the punch. and that can only be done if you make freeb= sd and > linux operate from within NT/2000 before MS does. because mock my wo= rd. it > will happen. and you will be left out in the cold with the tears fro= zen to > your face. ; ) >=20 > ALL OF WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN in the paragraphs BELOW IS NOW MOOT. I HA= VE > FOUND THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS I HAD ABOVE. INTERIX 2.2 the only= thing > that you will possibly have over MS is price. yes their prices are > rediculous. but then, based on my experience with freebsd and linux,= that > old saying of `you get what you pay for', has never been more truthfu= l. > don't bother bitching about my remarks. as i have already seen that = i am > not the only one who has made them. i simply represent your best hop= e of > survival. i am a windows user that tried linux and then freebsd. an= d i > have done so at an expense that is completely unrecoverable. if you = don't > like my attitude, just remember that there are thousands of prospecti= ve > users just like me who will be no more tolerable of your shortcomings= than i > have been. and your arrogance will be your destruction. something i= will > greatly revel in. you purported to be the final solution to my and > everyoine else's problem with regards to internet computing systems. = that's > a lie. >=20 > http://www.provantage.com/scripts/go.dll/-s/fp_47736 > http://www.provantage.com/FC_MCSB.HTM >=20 > quite frankly, if i find the means to compile XFREE86-4.0 and gnome f= or NT, > i would probably never look back to linux or freebsd. i have already= found > numerous unix components to run under windows. and once i have learn= ed how > to use all of them, that will probably settle once and for all the qu= estion > of which system to use. ATT and others make various products which al= low for > the running of unix programs in a windows environment. i had some of= them > installed before i reinstalled NT and thereby erased those systems. = i am > now deciding which ones to reinstall. >=20 > so the bottomline is this. when i am able to install freebsd from a = running > windows nt system without the use of bootdisks (which supply the mean= s to > create and write to UFS, then and only then will i be willing to use > freebsd. i installed NT (six days) after becoming thoughroughly frus= tated > with freebsd. i need to have a completely functional heterogenious > operating environment. one which runs windows nt and freebsd on the = same > computer (preferably with only one filesystem; NTFS COMPRESSED). if = freebsd > is not capable of being installed from a running NT-environment witho= ut > having to be rebooted, that is an absolutely indisputable indicator t= hat > freebsd cannot operate cohesively within an NT-system. it's not up to= > microsoft to provide the means to read and write between NTFS and UFS= > without the question of damaging either system. freebsd is the alien= , not > MS. when freebsd generates the code that allows NT to write to UFS a= nd UFS > to write to NTFS COMPRESSED, then and only then will freebsd be a leg= itamate > addition to my NT environment. until then, it's just crap! >=20 >=20 >=20 -- Mike Meyer =09=09=09http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Unix/FreeBSD consultant,=09email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Dec 1 16:28:48 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from post.mail.nl.demon.net (post-10.mail.nl.demon.net [194.159.73.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3D3137B402; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 16:28:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [212.238.77.116] (helo=buffy.raggedclown) by post.mail.nl.demon.net with smtp (Exim 3.14 #2) id 1420Xi-0005c1-00; Sat, 02 Dec 2000 00:28:42 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by buffy.raggedclown (8.10.2/8.10.2) id eB20AqN04389; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:10:52 +0100 From: Cliff Sarginson Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:10:51 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.1.99] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Cc: "Mike Meyer" , , , , , To: Mike Meyer , "xavian anderson macpherson" References: <14887.12057.451329.642265@guru.mired.org> <004b01c05bec$a79cbb50$40461418@salem1.or.home.com> <14888.13097.187777.80105@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <14888.13097.187777.80105@guru.mired.org> Subject: Re: installing freebsd from windows nt without using boot disks MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <00120201105100.04232@buffy> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > xavian anderson macpherson types: > > i paid for the right to whine! Give it a rest mate. You will wear yourself out. All the energy you are expending on this drivel you are writing could be better spent learning something about errm .. Computer Operating Systems, just as an example. Try FreeBSD, I hear it's quite good :) Cliff To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Dec 1 16:55:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from linux.thesadmachine.org (dsl254-008-078-sea1.dsl-isp.net [216.254.8.78]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A70CE37B400 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 16:54:32 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 95474 invoked by uid 1001); 2 Dec 2000 01:04:13 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 01:04:13 -0000 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 19:04:13 -0600 (CST) From: brian william wolter To: Mike Meyer Cc: xavian anderson macpherson , , , , , , Subject: Re: installing freebsd from windows nt without using boot disks In-Reply-To: <14888.13097.187777.80105@guru.mired.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > i paid for the right to whine! i still have a $60 box of software that= is would i have the right to whine if i bought windows and was pissed that it wouldn't work on my SPARCStation? > > INTERIX. THE ONLY REDEMPTION YOU HAVE NOW IS TO WRITE A FREEBSD KERNEL= THAT > > FUNCTIONS AS A DLL OR EXE IN WINDOWS! if you can make all of the stabi= lity what is this redemption you keep talking about? freebsd has grown steadily for years. in fact within the last year it was added to Best Buy's shelves. that's pretty good for a UNIX OS as most don't get a lot of mainstream support. > > NOLONGER BE ANY ATTENTION PAID TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN WINDOWS. IT WAS = A > > HEROIC ATTEMPT AT THE PRESIDENCY, BUT MICROSOFT CONTROLS THE ELECTION! = IT'S > > OVER!! that's alright, we'll just demand recounts until the vote swings in our favor. (heh) > > FREEBSD FROM WINDOWS NT WITHOUT HAVING TO USE BOOT DISKS TO DO SO. I G= EUSS > > QUESTION POSED BY THE EMAIL. i geuss i was wrong to believe the advert= ising you spell guess wrong a lot > > space. i am not about to go out and buy a new scsi controller to make-= up > > for the shortcomings of one operating system. freebsd was supposed to = have yeah... i'm not going to buy a new computer either just because windows doesn't run on my IBM 5100 PC (released 1975) > > it's inception. maybe i am way off base. i am often wrong. but i do = know yes you are. > > it's statements of superiority. that box should have had a big asteRIS= K! on > > it. with more emphasis on RISK! as in buy at your own RISK!; the > > statements made herein do not reflect the qualitites purported to be tr= ue. thank you... i didn't catch it the first time. > > SERVICES FOR UNIX in future releases. when MS completely integrates un= ix > > (INTERIX) into windows 2000, so that any unix application can run on th= at > > (win2000) platform, without having a separate unix kernel to provide th= at > > functionality, NOONE WILL WRITE UNIX APPLICATIONS FOR ANYTHING ELSE THA= N > > WHAT MICROSOFT DECLARES IS THE LEGITIMATE UNIX ENVIRONMENT FOR WINDOWS = (AND > > HENCE THE WORLD)! microsoft has the power to make such a pronouncement= for UNIX people don't like microsoft. microsoft people don't know how to use UNIX. that's how it is and i don't believe the UNIX people are about to give up competent UNIX for microsoft's interpretation. > > "Interix 2.2 is a perfect complement to our current UNIX interoperabili= ty > > solution, and in the future, we plan to combine this functionality with > > Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX into one comprehensive UNIX applica= tion > > migration and interoperability solution." DO YOU SEE THE WRITING ON T= HE why do i want this when i don't want or need windows? that makes little sense. i'm not going to pay for windows so i can pay for UNIX when it's free to begin with. btw, weren't you the one complaining about how *holy shit!* advertisements stretch the truth? > > QUESTION POSED BY THE EMAIL. i geuss i was wrong to believe the advert= ising > > on the box. i had no reason, based on what was purported in the the > > ANY CLAIM THAT YOU MAKE AGAINST THE LEGITIMACY OF RUNNING UNIX IN WINDO= WS, > > CAN BE EQUALLY MADE AGAINST RUNNING LINUX IN FREEBSD. WHAT JUSTIFIES O= NE well to begin, they're both free... and i don't believe the point is to run linux *in* freebsd, but to have the ability to execute linux binaries. > > their packages, all further unix developement will be windows unix (as > > defined only by MICROSOFT) developement. it will nolonger be a matter = of microsoft already tried to make unix back in 1981. it was crap and nobody bought it. > > the benefits of the Windows environment without having to rewrite criti= cal there are benifits? what? > > integrated with the Windows desktop, security model and file system. In= terix yeah... windows security is just fabulous > > preserving the look and feel of UNIX applications, which eliminates the= need > > to retrain users. Interix 2.2 also provides extensive scripting support= and > > enables users to maintain the use of common scripting languages and too= ls. i'm just not understanding why you would install microsoft in the first place if you're just going to run UNIX on it... why not use, um... UNIX? > > i wish you had too. as a side note... i'm not sure exactly who you think you are that anyone here would care what you have to say. frankly i couldn't care less whether or not you fall out of a high window much less what type of operating system you use... i did enjoy the email though... thanks for the laughs. peace, brian =09=09t h e S a d M a c h i n e . o r g On Fri, 1 Dec 2000, Mike Meyer wrote: > So go whine at the people you gave the $60 to, not the *volunteers* > who are on the -questions list. You might as well drop me from the CC > list - the only whining children I have to deal with are mine; except > they've grown past acting like you do. Once I read the claim that you > paid for the right, I stopped reading. > > =09 > xavian anderson macpherson types: > > i paid for the right to whine! i still have a $60 box of software that= is > > nothing more than a doorstop. ironically, the only way that i may be ab= le to > > use the software on the freebsd cd's, is to buy a MICROSOFT PRODUCT aka > > INTERIX. THE ONLY REDEMPTION YOU HAVE NOW IS TO WRITE A FREEBSD KERNEL= THAT > > FUNCTIONS AS A DLL OR EXE IN WINDOWS! if you can make all of the stabi= lity > > features of freebsd portable to windows, such that freebsd becomes a pa= ckage > > that windows users can add-on to their existing platform, to function i= n the > > same way as the ANTICRASH and other utilities that i have running on my > > system, then you may have some sort of redemption in terms of a future.= but > > based on what i have included in this email below, freebsd and everyone= elso > > too) has a very limited term of existance in the face of increasing > > MICROSOFT encroachment into unix interoperability. UNIX WILL BECOME A > > UTILITY FOR WINDOWS. think i'm crazy? read (the third paragrph) below= ! > > THE ONLY THING THAT PREVENTED MICROSOFT FROM HAVING ABSOLUTE DOMINANCE > > BEFORE, WAS IT'S LACK OF A VIABLE UNIX IMPLEMENTATION. even APPLE comp= uter > > now has a linux platform. when MICROSOFT does with linux what freebsd = did, > > and allows linux to run in windows NT/2000, linux and unix will fall un= der > > the single auspices of MICROSOFT. whether that will be functionally tr= ue or > > not is irrelevant. MICROSOFT ONLY HAS TO CREATE THE IMPRESSION OR > > APPEARANCE OF COMPLETE INTEROPERABILITY. ONCE MICROSOFT HAS NEGATED TH= E > > ARGUEMENT OF WINDOWS VS UNIX (BY PORTING UNIX TO WINDOWS) THERE WILL > > NOLONGER BE ANY ATTENTION PAID TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN WINDOWS. IT WAS = A > > HEROIC ATTEMPT AT THE PRESIDENCY, BUT MICROSOFT CONTROLS THE ELECTION! = IT'S > > OVER!! > > > > [this paragraph was written before i added everything about INTERIX in = the > > paragraph above. i only leave this here as history, as freebsd will sh= ortly > > become. MS INTERIX may answer all of the questions and aspirations i > > previously had.] THE QUESTION WAS, WHEN WILL IT BE POSSIBLE TO INSTALL > > FREEBSD FROM WINDOWS NT WITHOUT HAVING TO USE BOOT DISKS TO DO SO. I G= EUSS > > YOU DIDN'T READ THE SUBJECT LINE OF THE EMAIL. I THINK THAT IS WHAT IT= (THE > > SUBJECTLINE) IS FOR. IT STATED VERY CLEARLY THE INTENT, PURPOSE AND > > QUESTION POSED BY THE EMAIL. i geuss i was wrong to believe the advert= ising > > on the box. i had no reason, based on what was purported in the the > > statement of `professional quality', `for serious internet users', etc.= to > > mean that freebsd would offer a LOWER LEVEL OF COMPATABLITY than the li= nux > > systems i had previously used. i brought freebsd because i thought it = would > > give me the level of interoperabilty that i wanted. what i wanted was = a > > single OSystem that would run linux and unix on one single platform. t= he > > sad fact is that even if i did get it running, i still wouldn't have us= e of > > my cdrom or the scsi disk which i had previously used with both linux > > versions (and now NT as well) for the exclusive purpose of virtual memo= ry > > space. i am not about to go out and buy a new scsi controller to make-= up > > for the shortcomings of one operating system. freebsd was supposed to = have > > been around longer than linux. why then is it deficient in the area of > > drivers for ancient equipment that were clearly around before linux eve= n > > existed? this is really not an issue of age or maturity regarding a > > specific OS. it is a matter of intent. linux strove for universality = from > > it's inception. maybe i am way off base. i am often wrong. but i do = know > > that i wanted a single OS that would handle unix and linux. (I HAD NO > > DESIRE TO GO BACK TO WINDOWS!!) SINGLE SYSTEM INTEROPERABLITY is what > > freebsd claimed to do. that is why i brought it. i thought i would no= t be > > without ANY of the functionality i came to expect from linux. freebsd = did > > not deliver on the satisfaction of my expectations which were in fact > > reasonable, based on the statements i read on the box. superior is jus= t > > that, SUPERIOR! it is a term of absolutes. it is was also further cla= imed > > in the 800 page handbook (which was my main reason for buying the > > power-pak), that freebsd had a higher level of developement than linux = and > > was therefore more stable as a result. (based on these claims, why sho= uld i > > have expected to not be able to use the equipemnt i was already using i= n > > linux?) i had no reason to think that freebsd was in being selective i= n > > it's statements of superiority. that box should have had a big asteRIS= K! on > > it. with more emphasis on RISK! as in buy at your own RISK!; the > > statements made herein do not reflect the qualitites purported to be tr= ue. > > > > now, while you gloat at the apparent triumph the unix community may thi= nk it > > gained by MS buying INTERIX and now including it as part of the windows > > environment, IT IS NOT A TRIUMPH. the bottomline is that MS is not abo= ut to > > go away. YOU CAN THINK OF THIS MICROSOFT ACQUISITION AS THE ANT OR WAS= P (i > > forget which does what to whom) THAT LAYS IT'S EGGS IN THE BODY OF THE > > OTHER, ONLY TO HAVE IT'S LARVAE EAT IT'S HOST FROM THE INSIDE OUT!! th= ey > > will never forfeit their dominance on the computing community, no matte= r how > > infantile you may think their systems are. MS will eat you from the i= nside > > out. as i stated in another email, MS can integrate any opensource un= ix > > (and/or linux) into the windows environment it wants to. and it will. = it > > (MS) has already stated that they are going include INTERIX into the > > SERVICES FOR UNIX in future releases. when MS completely integrates un= ix > > (INTERIX) into windows 2000, so that any unix application can run on th= at > > (win2000) platform, without having a separate unix kernel to provide th= at > > functionality, NOONE WILL WRITE UNIX APPLICATIONS FOR ANYTHING ELSE THA= N > > WHAT MICROSOFT DECLARES IS THE LEGITIMATE UNIX ENVIRONMENT FOR WINDOWS = (AND > > HENCE THE WORLD)! microsoft has the power to make such a pronouncement= for > > all the world to follow. and once said, the world will do just that, > > FOLLOW! including you! > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/zipdocs/interix_technotes.exe thi= s is > > the link for all the documentation regarding the functionaslity of INTE= RIX > > in the windows environment. of course you need windows to read it. so = for > > those of you who don't have windows, i'll download and extract it, and > > repackage it as a zip file to attach to this email. even if you don't = use > > windows at all, it makes sense to know what MICROSOFT intends to do wit= h the > > unix community. CANNABALISM couldn't be better! > > > > "Interix 2.2 is a perfect complement to our current UNIX interoperabili= ty > > solution, and in the future, we plan to combine this functionality with > > Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX into one comprehensive UNIX applica= tion > > migration and interoperability solution." DO YOU SEE THE WRITING ON T= HE > > WALL? > > > > ANY CLAIM THAT YOU MAKE AGAINST THE LEGITIMACY OF RUNNING UNIX IN WINDO= WS, > > CAN BE EQUALLY MADE AGAINST RUNNING LINUX IN FREEBSD. WHAT JUSTIFIES O= NE > > JUSTIFIES THE OTHER!! Microsoft may get it wrong to start out with, bu= t > > that won't be the case for long. they want absolute domination. and t= hey > > will do whatever it takes to do that. INTERIX is the "shot across the = bow" > > of the unix community. it serves to give notice of the MS agenda to us= urp > > any legitimacy of unix as their own. when (previously unix) developers > > realize that they have the absolute standard of windows on which to bui= ld > > their packages, all further unix developement will be windows unix (as > > defined only by MICROSOFT) developement. it will nolonger be a matter = of > > which version of unix is superior to another. that question will be MO= OT. > > it will be as it has always been, a question of profitability and expen= se. > > NO, I DON'T REALLU LIKE THE IDEA OF ONLY HAVING MICROSOFT CONTROLLING > > EVERYTHING. but there are plenty of things in this life that i don't > > particularly like. and my or your disliking the reality of the world i= n > > which we live, does not change that world. only intelligent directed a= ction > > will do that. my statement about writing the freebsd kernel as a windo= ws > > dll or exe mayseem reprehensible to you, but ultimately your survival w= ill > > depend on that very act of infiltration. you cannot stop the INEVITABI= LITY > > of MICROSOFT porting unix into windows NT/2000. that is clearly their > > intent. noone is going to want to write unix apllications that don't > > conform to any standards that MICROSOFT imposes by the dictates of thei= r > > massive dominance. > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/default.asp > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp > > http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2000/Feb00/InterixPR.asp > > > > "Interix provided all of the UNIX functionality necessary to efficientl= y > > move the code to Windows NT," Klinect said. "One of the key advantages = was > > that the code ported to Interix could still be deployed on the IRS' leg= acy > > UNIX systems during its transition to Windows NT, maintaining the requi= red > > 24x7 full functionality for this mission-critical application." > > > > Interix 2.2 eases the migration of existing UNIX applications and scrip= ts by > > providing a robust, high-performance environment for running such > > applications. It allows users with UNIX environments to take advantage = of > > the benefits of the Windows environment without having to rewrite criti= cal > > applications. In addition, users can immediately use the full Windows-b= ased > > application development environment to develop native Win32=AE API-base= d > > applications. Interix 2.2 provides over 300 utilities and tools and is = fully > > integrated with the Windows desktop, security model and file system. In= terix > > 2.2 is a native subsystem to Windows, providing the highest performance= for > > running UNIX applications. The Interix 2.2 Software Development Kit, wh= ich > > is included with Interix 2.2, supports over 1,900 UNIX APIs and helps e= ase > > migration of existing UNIX applications to the Interix environment. > > > > Interix 2.2 provides UNIX users with a familiar environment and set of = tools > > to leverage their existing UNIX expertise. For example, the tools and > > utilities behave exactly as they would on other UNIX systems while > > preserving the look and feel of UNIX applications, which eliminates the= need > > to retrain users. Interix 2.2 also provides extensive scripting support= and > > enables users to maintain the use of common scripting languages and too= ls. > > > > > > > > Interix 2.2 brings Microsoft customers one step closer to its vision of= a > > single desktop computer for all uses by providing a complete enterprise > > platform to run all Windows-based, UNIX and Internet applications. Inte= rix > > 2.2 also helps simplify the administration of heterogeneous environment= s by > > providing UNIX system administrators with access to Windows-based syste= ms > > using familiar tools and management strategies, thus reducing system > > administration and total cost of ownership. Interix 2.2 also provides s= ystem > > administrators with a familiar set of remote administration tools and b= atch > > support, enabling efficient system administration. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Mike Meyer" > > To: "xavian anderson macpherson" > > Cc: > > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 8:54 PM > > Subject: Re: installing freebsd from windows nt without using boot disk= s > > > > > > > I hope you enjoyed writing your troll. I only wish you had been matur= e > > > enough to post it to the correct list, or not to post it at all. This > > > is QUESTIONS@freebsd.org. You didn't ask any. Since your message was > > > nothing but opinion and ranting, it should have gone to > > > ADVOCACY@freebsd.org. > > > > > > If you don't like FreeBSD because it won't do what you want, either > > > don't use, or fix it. If you don't have the expertise to fix it, > > > either hire someone, or ask politely. Coming off like a whining > > > preschooler won't get you help, it'll just make people mad at you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > this is an updated version of the letter previously sent. > > > > ORIGINAL MESSAGE > > xavian anderson macpherson > > http://www.professional3d.com > > > > i purchased freebsd about two months ago. i have not yet been able to = get > > it to run. i went through the trouble and expense of buying the power-= pak > > 4.0 so that i would have the 800 page handbook. (i wanted freebsd beca= use i > > thought it would be the last system i would ever need to buy.) i also > > wanted the full 10-cd collection of software. the fact of the matter i= s > > that the cd's were worthless to me because freebsd would not recognize = my > > multifunction soundcard as a valid scsi device; which by the way, both > > versions of linux (suse and mandrake) and windows nt were able to use > > without any difficulty whatsoever. i have found the repeated claims of > > freebsd superiority to be a bunch of crap! > > > > i have absolutely no idea how something so superior to windows and linu= x is > > unable to recognize the presense of my adaptec aha152x scsi adaptor on = my > > soundblaster 16 card. maybe it's too beneath freebsd to recognize my l= owly > > implementation of scsi. i knew that freebsd claimed to be mature; mayb= e > > poor vision is also the side-effect of this protracted maturity. eithe= r > > that or this maturity has imbued you with yet another ailment common to > > advancing age. that ailment is arrogance. that seems to be the only > > explanation for this; as the common response that i have received from= many > > but not all, has been one of arrogance and contempt that i would dare t= o > > question the godlike qualities of freebsd. so let me make it personal. > > there is no problem with my scsi card. i have had three working operat= ing > > system to prove it. the problem is with the software (and it's develop= ers) > > that freebsd uses. now you may like to claim that linux is a developer > > system. but the fact is, that those (infantile) developers seem to be = doing > > a much (indisputably) better job of handling the developement of driver= s > > than freebsd. > > > > i was forced to use the ftp server as my source of installation; negati= ng > > the very purpose for which i purchased the power-pak (as everything tha= t is > > in the power-pak can be had on the net). after installing the system f= rom > > the net, it ran just long enough for me to try to install the XFREE86 4= =2E0, > > which then made my system inoperable. after that i was never able to g= et it > > to run again. quite some time later after all of this, i tried to crea= te > > bootdisks for the latest version of freebsd. when i went to reboot my > > system with these new disks, the system said that there was no kernel o= n the > > floppies. you make sense of it. i created the disks using a commandli= ne > > instruction within NT. the first disks that i made were done with linu= x. > > as i nolonger have a running linux system, i cannot revert to it to mak= e the > > bootdisks for freebsd. so either i have a freebsd installation system = which > > runs from NT without rebooting, or it's unusable. i mean let's get re= al. > > if linux can (and does) allow for it (linux) to be run on a windows (no= t NT) > > formatted disk, what the hell is the reason that freebsd can't do the s= ame > > and better (as you so fraudulently claim). and don't tell me how poor = of a > > solution the UMSDOS is. certainly if freebsd is so advanced, there is = no > > excuse for there not being an even better system available from freebsd= ; and > > especially for NT. since NT is the highend of the windows system, it o= nly > > makes sense that freebsd should be directed towards providing REAL SOLU= TIONS > > for NT. i don't want to hear excuses. I WANT RESULTS! > > > > NT has something that the standard UFS does not have. it has an integr= ated > > compressed filesystem. with it, i have increased my storage space by n= o > > less than 35%. if you had the same feature, i would have 5GB's of > > effective space instead of only 3.7GB's available for freebsd. but at = this > > point in time, i am not willing to install freebsd until the aforementi= on > > criteria are met. if someone knows of a single package that i can inst= all > > on my existing NT platform, that will allow for the seemless operation = of > > unix programs as though they were native windows applications, i for on= e > > would like to hear about it. i just went to the windows site and found > > something they call WINDOWS SERVICES FOR UNIX 2.0. i don't know how lo= ng it > > had been around or how good it is. i found it by simply typing `window= snt > > unix' into my browsers address bar to get a search on those keywords. > > > > http://shop.microsoft.com/Products/Products_Feed/Online/WindowsServices= forUN > > IX[759]/ProductOverview.asp > > > > i just found what may be the very thing i was asking for. after writin= g the > > above paragraph, i went back to the link above and did further reading.= i > > came across something called INTERIX. so once again i did a net search= and > > came up with a site that sells it. in reading, i found that it is now = a MS > > unix-product. it seems to provide the unix components to windows NT cl= ass > > environments. i will do more reseach on this. and if i find it to be > > usable, i'll buy it. putting an end to any further questions about fre= ebsd > > or any other variant of unix or linux. let's face it, MS is in a much > > better position to employ unix components such as freebsd than the reve= rse. > > you might as well look at the writing on the wall. the very openness t= hat > > allows anyone to use freebsd and linux source code, allows MS to add it= to > > their own systems without anyone having any right to complain about it.= as > > long as MS uses an open source version of unix, they could do anything = they > > want to integrate it into the existing windows environment. and all th= at > > any of you can do is sit back and wipe your eyes. WHIMPER WHIMPER WHIM= PER!! > > you have basically written your own obituarary. because windows can fr= eely > > integrate open source systems, but the same is not true of the open sou= rce > > community. hence there will ultimately be no justification for your > > existance. you will be relegated to the status of footnote; and frankl= y the > > sooner the better. the system that MS ultimately chooses for their > > integrated environment, will become the status quo. if you thought tha= t > > windows was dominant before, wait until they put unix interoperability = into > > the windows NT/2000 framework. your only choice is to set the lead, by > > beating MS to the punch. and that can only be done if you make freebsd= and > > linux operate from within NT/2000 before MS does. because mock my word= =2E it > > will happen. and you will be left out in the cold with the tears froze= n to > > your face. ; ) > > > > ALL OF WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN in the paragraphs BELOW IS NOW MOOT. I HAVE > > FOUND THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS I HAD ABOVE. INTERIX 2.2 the only t= hing > > that you will possibly have over MS is price. yes their prices are > > rediculous. but then, based on my experience with freebsd and linux, t= hat > > old saying of `you get what you pay for', has never been more truthful. > > don't bother bitching about my remarks. as i have already seen that i = am > > not the only one who has made them. i simply represent your best hope = of > > survival. i am a windows user that tried linux and then freebsd. and = i > > have done so at an expense that is completely unrecoverable. if you do= n't > > like my attitude, just remember that there are thousands of prospective > > users just like me who will be no more tolerable of your shortcomings t= han i > > have been. and your arrogance will be your destruction. something i w= ill > > greatly revel in. you purported to be the final solution to my and > > everyoine else's problem with regards to internet computing systems. t= hat's > > a lie. > > > > http://www.provantage.com/scripts/go.dll/-s/fp_47736 > > http://www.provantage.com/FC_MCSB.HTM > > > > quite frankly, if i find the means to compile XFREE86-4.0 and gnome for= NT, > > i would probably never look back to linux or freebsd. i have already f= ound > > numerous unix components to run under windows. and once i have learned= how > > to use all of them, that will probably settle once and for all the ques= tion > > of which system to use. ATT and others make various products which allo= w for > > the running of unix programs in a windows environment. i had some of t= hem > > installed before i reinstalled NT and thereby erased those systems. i = am > > now deciding which ones to reinstall. > > > > so the bottomline is this. when i am able to install freebsd from a ru= nning > > windows nt system without the use of bootdisks (which supply the means = to > > create and write to UFS, then and only then will i be willing to use > > freebsd. i installed NT (six days) after becoming thoughroughly frusta= ted > > with freebsd. i need to have a completely functional heterogenious > > operating environment. one which runs windows nt and freebsd on the sa= me > > computer (preferably with only one filesystem; NTFS COMPRESSED). if fr= eebsd > > is not capable of being installed from a running NT-environment without > > having to be rebooted, that is an absolutely indisputable indicator tha= t > > freebsd cannot operate cohesively within an NT-system. it's not up to > > microsoft to provide the means to read and write between NTFS and UFS > > without the question of damaging either system. freebsd is the alien, = not > > MS. when freebsd generates the code that allows NT to write to UFS and= UFS > > to write to NTFS COMPRESSED, then and only then will freebsd be a legit= amate > > addition to my NT environment. until then, it's just crap! > > > > > > > -- > Mike Meyer =09=09=09http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ > Independent WWW/Unix/FreeBSD consultant,=09email for more information. > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" 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 Fri Dec 1 21:15:30 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from dc-mx06.cluster0.hsacorp.net (unknown [209.225.8.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C780137B400; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 21:15:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from [24.216.177.202] (HELO CONCON.enterit.com) by dc-mx06.cluster0.hsacorp.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4b1) with ESMTP id 13224856; Fri, 01 Dec 2000 22:14:08 -0700 Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.0.20001202003001.02a68968@mail.enterit.com> X-Sender: jconner@mail.enterit.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 00:30:54 -0500 To: Mike Meyer From: Jim Conner Subject: Re: installing freebsd from windows nt without using boot disks Cc: "xavian anderson macpherson" , "Mike Meyer" , , , , , In-Reply-To: <14888.13097.187777.80105@guru.mired.org> References: <004b01c05bec$a79cbb50$40461418@salem1.or.home.com> <14887.12057.451329.642265@guru.mired.org> <004b01c05bec$a79cbb50$40461418@salem1.or.home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG We are the borg! You will be assimilated... sound familiar? =3DP Blow it out your arse punk! As for me in my house, I= =20 shall use a Unix OS! - Jim At 05:24 PM 12/1/2000 -0600, Mike Meyer wrote: >So go whine at the people you gave the $60 to, not the *volunteers* >who are on the -questions list. You might as well drop me from the CC >list - the only whining children I have to deal with are mine; except >they've grown past acting like you do. Once I read the claim that you >paid for the right, I stopped reading. > > >xavian anderson macpherson types: > > i paid for the right to whine! i still have a $60 box of software that= is > > nothing more than a doorstop. ironically, the only way that i may be=20 > able to > > use the software on the freebsd cd's, is to buy a MICROSOFT PRODUCT aka > > INTERIX. THE ONLY REDEMPTION YOU HAVE NOW IS TO WRITE A FREEBSD KERNEL= =20 > THAT > > FUNCTIONS AS A DLL OR EXE IN WINDOWS! if you can make all of the= stability > > features of freebsd portable to windows, such that freebsd becomes a=20 > package > > that windows users can add-on to their existing platform, to function=20 > in the > > same way as the ANTICRASH and other utilities that i have running on my > > system, then you may have some sort of redemption in terms of a=20 > future. but > > based on what i have included in this email below, freebsd and everyone= =20 > elso > > too) has a very limited term of existance in the face of increasing > > MICROSOFT encroachment into unix interoperability. UNIX WILL BECOME A > > UTILITY FOR WINDOWS. think i'm crazy? read (the third paragrph) below! > > THE ONLY THING THAT PREVENTED MICROSOFT FROM HAVING ABSOLUTE DOMINANCE > > BEFORE, WAS IT'S LACK OF A VIABLE UNIX IMPLEMENTATION. even APPLE= computer > > now has a linux platform. when MICROSOFT does with linux what freebsd= did, > > and allows linux to run in windows NT/2000, linux and unix will fall= under > > the single auspices of MICROSOFT. whether that will be functionally=20 > true or > > not is irrelevant. MICROSOFT ONLY HAS TO CREATE THE IMPRESSION OR > > APPEARANCE OF COMPLETE INTEROPERABILITY. ONCE MICROSOFT HAS NEGATED THE > > ARGUEMENT OF WINDOWS VS UNIX (BY PORTING UNIX TO WINDOWS) THERE WILL > > NOLONGER BE ANY ATTENTION PAID TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN WINDOWS. IT WAS A > > HEROIC ATTEMPT AT THE PRESIDENCY, BUT MICROSOFT CONTROLS THE=20 > ELECTION! IT'S > > OVER!! > > > > [this paragraph was written before i added everything about INTERIX in= the > > paragraph above. i only leave this here as history, as freebsd will=20 > shortly > > become. MS INTERIX may answer all of the questions and aspirations i > > previously had.] THE QUESTION WAS, WHEN WILL IT BE POSSIBLE TO INSTALL > > FREEBSD FROM WINDOWS NT WITHOUT HAVING TO USE BOOT DISKS TO DO SO. I= GEUSS > > YOU DIDN'T READ THE SUBJECT LINE OF THE EMAIL. I THINK THAT IS WHAT IT= =20 > (THE > > SUBJECTLINE) IS FOR. IT STATED VERY CLEARLY THE INTENT, PURPOSE AND > > QUESTION POSED BY THE EMAIL. i geuss i was wrong to believe the=20 > advertising > > on the box. i had no reason, based on what was purported in the the > > statement of `professional quality', `for serious internet users',= etc.to > > mean that freebsd would offer a LOWER LEVEL OF COMPATABLITY than the= linux > > systems i had previously used. i brought freebsd because i thought it= =20 > would > > give me the level of interoperabilty that i wanted. what i wanted was a > > single OSystem that would run linux and unix on one single platform. = the > > sad fact is that even if i did get it running, i still wouldn't have use= of > > my cdrom or the scsi disk which i had previously used with both linux > > versions (and now NT as well) for the exclusive purpose of virtual= memory > > space. i am not about to go out and buy a new scsi controller to= make-up > > for the shortcomings of one operating system. freebsd was supposed to= have > > been around longer than linux. why then is it deficient in the area of > > drivers for ancient equipment that were clearly around before linux even > > existed? this is really not an issue of age or maturity regarding a > > specific OS. it is a matter of intent. linux strove for universality= from > > it's inception. maybe i am way off base. i am often wrong. but i do= know > > that i wanted a single OS that would handle unix and linux. (I HAD NO > > DESIRE TO GO BACK TO WINDOWS!!) SINGLE SYSTEM INTEROPERABLITY is what > > freebsd claimed to do. that is why i brought it. i thought i would not= be > > without ANY of the functionality i came to expect from linux. freebsd= did > > not deliver on the satisfaction of my expectations which were in fact > > reasonable, based on the statements i read on the box. superior is just > > that, SUPERIOR! it is a term of absolutes. it is was also further= claimed > > in the 800 page handbook (which was my main reason for buying the > > power-pak), that freebsd had a higher level of developement than linux= and > > was therefore more stable as a result. (based on these claims, why=20 > should i > > have expected to not be able to use the equipemnt i was already using in > > linux?) i had no reason to think that freebsd was in being selective in > > it's statements of superiority. that box should have had a big=20 > asteRISK! on > > it. with more emphasis on RISK! as in buy at your own RISK!; the > > statements made herein do not reflect the qualitites purported to be= true. > > > > now, while you gloat at the apparent triumph the unix community may=20 > think it > > gained by MS buying INTERIX and now including it as part of the windows > > environment, IT IS NOT A TRIUMPH. the bottomline is that MS is not=20 > about to > > go away. YOU CAN THINK OF THIS MICROSOFT ACQUISITION AS THE ANT OR WASP= (i > > forget which does what to whom) THAT LAYS IT'S EGGS IN THE BODY OF THE > > OTHER, ONLY TO HAVE IT'S LARVAE EAT IT'S HOST FROM THE INSIDE OUT!! = they > > will never forfeit their dominance on the computing community, no=20 > matter how > > infantile you may think their systems are. MS will eat you from the=20 > inside > > out. as i stated in another email, MS can integrate any opensource= unix > > (and/or linux) into the windows environment it wants to. and it will. = it > > (MS) has already stated that they are going include INTERIX into the > > SERVICES FOR UNIX in future releases. when MS completely integrates= unix > > (INTERIX) into windows 2000, so that any unix application can run on= that > > (win2000) platform, without having a separate unix kernel to provide= that > > functionality, NOONE WILL WRITE UNIX APPLICATIONS FOR ANYTHING ELSE THAN > > WHAT MICROSOFT DECLARES IS THE LEGITIMATE UNIX ENVIRONMENT FOR WINDOWS= (AND > > HENCE THE WORLD)! microsoft has the power to make such a pronouncement= for > > all the world to follow. and once said, the world will do just that, > > FOLLOW! including you! > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/zipdocs/interix_technotes.exe this= is > > the link for all the documentation regarding the functionaslity of= INTERIX > > in the windows environment. of course you need windows to read it. so= for > > those of you who don't have windows, i'll download and extract it, and > > repackage it as a zip file to attach to this email. even if you don't= use > > windows at all, it makes sense to know what MICROSOFT intends to do=20 > with the > > unix community. CANNABALISM couldn't be better! > > > > "Interix 2.2 is a perfect complement to our current UNIX= interoperability > > solution, and in the future, we plan to combine this functionality with > > Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX into one comprehensive UNIX= application > > migration and interoperability solution." DO YOU SEE THE WRITING ON= THE > > WALL? > > > > ANY CLAIM THAT YOU MAKE AGAINST THE LEGITIMACY OF RUNNING UNIX IN= WINDOWS, > > CAN BE EQUALLY MADE AGAINST RUNNING LINUX IN FREEBSD. WHAT JUSTIFIES= ONE > > JUSTIFIES THE OTHER!! Microsoft may get it wrong to start out with, but > > that won't be the case for long. they want absolute domination. and= they > > will do whatever it takes to do that. INTERIX is the "shot across the= bow" > > of the unix community. it serves to give notice of the MS agenda to= usurp > > any legitimacy of unix as their own. when (previously unix) developers > > realize that they have the absolute standard of windows on which to= build > > their packages, all further unix developement will be windows unix (as > > defined only by MICROSOFT) developement. it will nolonger be a matter= of > > which version of unix is superior to another. that question will be= MOOT. > > it will be as it has always been, a question of profitability and= expense. > > NO, I DON'T REALLU LIKE THE IDEA OF ONLY HAVING MICROSOFT CONTROLLING > > EVERYTHING. but there are plenty of things in this life that i don't > > particularly like. and my or your disliking the reality of the world in > > which we live, does not change that world. only intelligent directed=20 > action > > will do that. my statement about writing the freebsd kernel as a= windows > > dll or exe mayseem reprehensible to you, but ultimately your survival= will > > depend on that very act of infiltration. you cannot stop the= INEVITABILITY > > of MICROSOFT porting unix into windows NT/2000. that is clearly their > > intent. noone is going to want to write unix apllications that don't > > conform to any standards that MICROSOFT imposes by the dictates of their > > massive dominance. > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/default.asp > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp > > http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2000/Feb00/InterixPR.asp > > > > "Interix provided all of the UNIX functionality necessary to efficiently > > move the code to Windows NT," Klinect said. "One of the key advantages= was > > that the code ported to Interix could still be deployed on the IRS'= legacy > > UNIX systems during its transition to Windows NT, maintaining the= required > > 24x7 full functionality for this mission-critical application." > > > > Interix 2.2 eases the migration of existing UNIX applications and=20 > scripts by > > providing a robust, high-performance environment for running such > > applications. It allows users with UNIX environments to take advantage= of > > the benefits of the Windows environment without having to rewrite= critical > > applications. In addition, users can immediately use the full= Windows-based > > application development environment to develop native Win32=AE API-based > > applications. Interix 2.2 provides over 300 utilities and tools and is= =20 > fully > > integrated with the Windows desktop, security model and file system.=20 > Interix > > 2.2 is a native subsystem to Windows, providing the highest performance= for > > running UNIX applications. The Interix 2.2 Software Development Kit,= which > > is included with Interix 2.2, supports over 1,900 UNIX APIs and helps= ease > > migration of existing UNIX applications to the Interix environment. > > > > Interix 2.2 provides UNIX users with a familiar environment and set of= =20 > tools > > to leverage their existing UNIX expertise. For example, the tools and > > utilities behave exactly as they would on other UNIX systems while > > preserving the look and feel of UNIX applications, which eliminates the= =20 > need > > to retrain users. Interix 2.2 also provides extensive scripting support= and > > enables users to maintain the use of common scripting languages and= tools. > > > > > > > > Interix 2.2 brings Microsoft customers one step closer to its vision of= a > > single desktop computer for all uses by providing a complete enterprise > > platform to run all Windows-based, UNIX and Internet applications.= Interix > > 2.2 also helps simplify the administration of heterogeneous environments= by > > providing UNIX system administrators with access to Windows-based= systems > > using familiar tools and management strategies, thus reducing system > > administration and total cost of ownership. Interix 2.2 also provides=20 > system > > administrators with a familiar set of remote administration tools and= batch > > support, enabling efficient system administration. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Mike Meyer" > > To: "xavian anderson macpherson" > > Cc: > > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 8:54 PM > > Subject: Re: installing freebsd from windows nt without using boot disks > > > > > > > I hope you enjoyed writing your troll. I only wish you had been mature > > > enough to post it to the correct list, or not to post it at all. This > > > is QUESTIONS@freebsd.org. You didn't ask any. Since your message was > > > nothing but opinion and ranting, it should have gone to > > > ADVOCACY@freebsd.org. > > > > > > If you don't like FreeBSD because it won't do what you want, either > > > don't use, or fix it. If you don't have the expertise to fix it, > > > either hire someone, or ask politely. Coming off like a whining > > > preschooler won't get you help, it'll just make people mad at you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > this is an updated version of the letter previously sent. > > > > ORIGINAL MESSAGE > > xavian anderson macpherson > > http://www.professional3d.com > > > > i purchased freebsd about two months ago. i have not yet been able to= get > > it to run. i went through the trouble and expense of buying the= power-pak > > 4.0 so that i would have the 800 page handbook. (i wanted freebsd=20 > because i > > thought it would be the last system i would ever need to buy.) i also > > wanted the full 10-cd collection of software. the fact of the matter is > > that the cd's were worthless to me because freebsd would not recognize= my > > multifunction soundcard as a valid scsi device; which by the way, both > > versions of linux (suse and mandrake) and windows nt were able to use > > without any difficulty whatsoever. i have found the repeated claims of > > freebsd superiority to be a bunch of crap! > > > > i have absolutely no idea how something so superior to windows and linux= is > > unable to recognize the presense of my adaptec aha152x scsi adaptor on= my > > soundblaster 16 card. maybe it's too beneath freebsd to recognize my= lowly > > implementation of scsi. i knew that freebsd claimed to be mature; maybe > > poor vision is also the side-effect of this protracted maturity. either > > that or this maturity has imbued you with yet another ailment common to > > advancing age. that ailment is arrogance. that seems to be the only > > explanation for this; as the common response that i have received from= =20 > many > > but not all, has been one of arrogance and contempt that i would dare to > > question the godlike qualities of freebsd. so let me make it personal. > > there is no problem with my scsi card. i have had three working= operating > > system to prove it. the problem is with the software (and it's= developers) > > that freebsd uses. now you may like to claim that linux is a developer > > system. but the fact is, that those (infantile) developers seem to be= =20 > doing > > a much (indisputably) better job of handling the developement of drivers > > than freebsd. > > > > i was forced to use the ftp server as my source of installation;= negating > > the very purpose for which i purchased the power-pak (as everything that= is > > in the power-pak can be had on the net). after installing the system= from > > the net, it ran just long enough for me to try to install the XFREE86= 4.0, > > which then made my system inoperable. after that i was never able to=20 > get it > > to run again. quite some time later after all of this, i tried to= create > > bootdisks for the latest version of freebsd. when i went to reboot my > > system with these new disks, the system said that there was no kernel=20 > on the > > floppies. you make sense of it. i created the disks using a= commandline > > instruction within NT. the first disks that i made were done with= linux. > > as i nolonger have a running linux system, i cannot revert to it to=20 > make the > > bootdisks for freebsd. so either i have a freebsd installation system= =20 > which > > runs from NT without rebooting, or it's unusable. i mean let's get= real. > > if linux can (and does) allow for it (linux) to be run on a windows=20 > (not NT) > > formatted disk, what the hell is the reason that freebsd can't do the= same > > and better (as you so fraudulently claim). and don't tell me how poor= of a > > solution the UMSDOS is. certainly if freebsd is so advanced, there is= no > > excuse for there not being an even better system available from=20 > freebsd; and > > especially for NT. since NT is the highend of the windows system, it= only > > makes sense that freebsd should be directed towards providing REAL=20 > SOLUTIONS > > for NT. i don't want to hear excuses. I WANT RESULTS! > > > > NT has something that the standard UFS does not have. it has an= integrated > > compressed filesystem. with it, i have increased my storage space by no > > less than 35%. if you had the same feature, i would have 5GB's of > > effective space instead of only 3.7GB's available for freebsd. but at= this > > point in time, i am not willing to install freebsd until the= aforemention > > criteria are met. if someone knows of a single package that i can= install > > on my existing NT platform, that will allow for the seemless operation= of > > unix programs as though they were native windows applications, i for one > > would like to hear about it. i just went to the windows site and found > > something they call WINDOWS SERVICES FOR UNIX 2.0. i don't know how=20 > long it > > had been around or how good it is. i found it by simply typing= `windowsnt > > unix' into my browsers address bar to get a search on those keywords. > > > >=20 >= http://shop.microsoft.com/Products/Products_Feed/Online/WindowsServicesforU= N > > IX[759]/ProductOverview.asp > > > > i just found what may be the very thing i was asking for. after=20 > writing the > > above paragraph, i went back to the link above and did further reading. = i > > came across something called INTERIX. so once again i did a net search= and > > came up with a site that sells it. in reading, i found that it is now a= MS > > unix-product. it seems to provide the unix components to windows NT= class > > environments. i will do more reseach on this. and if i find it to be > > usable, i'll buy it. putting an end to any further questions about= freebsd > > or any other variant of unix or linux. let's face it, MS is in a much > > better position to employ unix components such as freebsd than the= reverse. > > you might as well look at the writing on the wall. the very openness= that > > allows anyone to use freebsd and linux source code, allows MS to add it= to > > their own systems without anyone having any right to complain about it. = as > > long as MS uses an open source version of unix, they could do anything= they > > want to integrate it into the existing windows environment. and all= that > > any of you can do is sit back and wipe your eyes. WHIMPER WHIMPER=20 > WHIMPER!! > > you have basically written your own obituarary. because windows can= freely > > integrate open source systems, but the same is not true of the open= source > > community. hence there will ultimately be no justification for your > > existance. you will be relegated to the status of footnote; and=20 > frankly the > > sooner the better. the system that MS ultimately chooses for their > > integrated environment, will become the status quo. if you thought that > > windows was dominant before, wait until they put unix interoperability= into > > the windows NT/2000 framework. your only choice is to set the lead, by > > beating MS to the punch. and that can only be done if you make freebsd= and > > linux operate from within NT/2000 before MS does. because mock my=20 > word. it > > will happen. and you will be left out in the cold with the tears frozen= to > > your face. ; ) > > > > ALL OF WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN in the paragraphs BELOW IS NOW MOOT. I HAVE > > FOUND THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS I HAD ABOVE. INTERIX 2.2 the only= thing > > that you will possibly have over MS is price. yes their prices are > > rediculous. but then, based on my experience with freebsd and linux,= that > > old saying of `you get what you pay for', has never been more truthful. > > don't bother bitching about my remarks. as i have already seen that i= am > > not the only one who has made them. i simply represent your best hope= of > > survival. i am a windows user that tried linux and then freebsd. and i > > have done so at an expense that is completely unrecoverable. if you= don't > > like my attitude, just remember that there are thousands of prospective > > users just like me who will be no more tolerable of your shortcomings=20 > than i > > have been. and your arrogance will be your destruction. something i= will > > greatly revel in. you purported to be the final solution to my and > > everyoine else's problem with regards to internet computing=20 > systems. that's > > a lie. > > > > http://www.provantage.com/scripts/go.dll/-s/fp_47736 > > http://www.provantage.com/FC_MCSB.HTM > > > > quite frankly, if i find the means to compile XFREE86-4.0 and gnome for= NT, > > i would probably never look back to linux or freebsd. i have already= found > > numerous unix components to run under windows. and once i have learned= how > > to use all of them, that will probably settle once and for all the= question > > of which system to use. ATT and others make various products which=20 > allow for > > the running of unix programs in a windows environment. i had some of= them > > installed before i reinstalled NT and thereby erased those systems. i= am > > now deciding which ones to reinstall. > > > > so the bottomline is this. when i am able to install freebsd from a=20 > running > > windows nt system without the use of bootdisks (which supply the means= to > > create and write to UFS, then and only then will i be willing to use > > freebsd. i installed NT (six days) after becoming thoughroughly= frustated > > with freebsd. i need to have a completely functional heterogenious > > operating environment. one which runs windows nt and freebsd on the= same > > computer (preferably with only one filesystem; NTFS COMPRESSED). if=20 > freebsd > > is not capable of being installed from a running NT-environment without > > having to be rebooted, that is an absolutely indisputable indicator that > > freebsd cannot operate cohesively within an NT-system. it's not up to > > microsoft to provide the means to read and write between NTFS and UFS > > without the question of damaging either system. freebsd is the alien,= not > > MS. when freebsd generates the code that allows NT to write to UFS and= UFS > > to write to NTFS COMPRESSED, then and only then will freebsd be a=20 > legitamate > > addition to my NT environment. until then, it's just crap! > > > > > > >-- >Mike Meyer = http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ >Independent WWW/Unix/FreeBSD consultant, email for more information. > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message - Jim - NOTJames - jconner@enterit.com - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - | Today's errors, in contrast: | - | Windows - "Invalid page fault in module kernel32.dll at 0032:A16F2935" | - | UNIX - "segmentation fault - core dumped" | - | Humans - "OOPS, I've fallen and I can't get up" | - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - (To view this properly use a non-proportional font in your MUA) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Dec 1 23: 2:14 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from yoda.dccnet.com (mail.deltacable.com [207.230.239.70]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B95E37B400 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 23:02:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from dccnet.com (unverified [209.5.158.158]) by yoda.dccnet.com (Rockliffe SMTPRA 3.4.6) with ESMTP id ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 23:02:05 -0800 Message-ID: <3A289E75.A09EFCB9@dccnet.com> Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 23:02:13 -0800 From: "Kevin G. Eliuk" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: xavian anderson macpherson Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: installing freebsd from windows nt without using boot disks References: <004b01c05bec$a79cbb50$40461418@salem1.or.home.com> <14887.12057.451329.642265@guru.mired.org> <004b01c05bec$a79cbb50$40461418@salem1.or.home.com> <5.0.0.25.0.20001202003001.02a68968@mail.enterit.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >xavian anderson macpherson types: I would think that after reading the the email typed, you'd be aware of your folly. What is it about Unix operating systems that makes those at microsoft want to make their look and feel be incorporated into its own environment? Could it be that the IT professional is accustomed to the environment and likes the power behind all the tools within its core distribution. Be aware I have heard about MS NT4 and W2K, and am in the position to maintain the same. I could probably match you word for word on the many frustrations that I feel being trapped in that environment. To put it bluntly, what the hell would it matter? You are not interested in the goals that drive the development of BSD, and what the development of BSD offers to the further development of other OSes. Anything else written will only be a personal attack on your character. -- Regards, )))))) )))))) )))))) Kevin G. Eliuk )) )) )) )) )) )) http://www.FreeBSD.org )) "Change your operating system, )) )) )) )) )) and You can change your World." )))))) )))))) )))))) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Dec 2 8:49:19 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from el.com.br (srv01.el.com.br [200.217.18.162]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2230A37B400 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:49:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from el.com.br (srv02.el.com.br [200.217.18.163]) by el.com.br (el_mail_server) with ESMTP id 142E518B6 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 14:49:14 -0200 (EDT) Message-ID: <3A292809.4BD42C15@el.com.br> Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 14:49:13 -0200 From: "Paiva, Gilson de" Reply-To: npd@el.com.br Organization: E&L Producoes de Software X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Uptime - Netcraft Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Please take a look at he statistics shown at http://uptime.netcraft.com/today/top.avg.html. Is this a good example of rock stable operating system ( BSD )?. As a user I just want to thank all you guys for giving us such a good OS. Congratulations! -- ======================================================== Paiva, Gilson de E&L Producoes de Software mailto:g-paiva@el.com.br Domingos Martins, ES, BRAZIL http://www.FreeBSD.org/ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve ======================================================== To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message