From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 5 21:35:21 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82C4D10656BA; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 21:35:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from mail-qy0-f182.google.com (mail-qy0-f182.google.com [209.85.216.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B8948FC21; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 21:35:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyk36 with SMTP id 36so15346076qyk.13 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:35:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.45.132 with SMTP id e4mr21622754qaf.296.1294261779449; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:09:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.188.68 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 13:09:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20110105175926.GA2101@vniz.net> References: <20110103220153.69cf59e0@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110104082252.45bb5e7f@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110105124045.6a0ddd1a@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110105175926.GA2101@vniz.net> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 13:09:39 -0800 Message-ID: From: Peter Wemm To: Andrey Chernov Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux kernel compatability X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:35:21 -0000 On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Andrey Chernov wrote: > On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:40:45PM -0500, Alexander Kabaev wrote: >> > I have heard this argument about the linuxulator and what we're >> > really talking about is slipping FreeBSD marketshare. =A0I don't share >> > the view that the linuxulator futhered this slip but rather my view >> > is that it allows us to stay relevant in areas where companies can >> > not justify an independent FreeBSD effort. =A0Adobe is a good example >> > of this. >> > >> >> It compounded the Adobe's reluctance to work on portable flash player. > > I agree with Alexander even more. We don't need _any_ Linux emulator in > the tree and even in the ports. Flash player is a good example of how > Linux emulator is harmful: instead of sending tons of complaints to Adobe > to force them to make native FreeBSD version, users tends to install Flas= h > via emulator and got all its pain as result. > > BTW, I have nothing against having source level Linux compatibility in > some places, because resulting binary will be FreeBSD one in any case, bu= t > I'm strongly against executable binary compatibility level. There's also the issue of the Linux folks using the API's as a political tool. The whole selective API exporting based on GPL status etc is a whole can of worms. I believe I've even read that they consider merely using non-blessed APIs causes your code to be a derivative of their GPL'ed code. Thought should be considered for their reactions to us implementing an API that they consider consumers of to be automatically become GPL'ed. --=20 Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; KI6FJV "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 "If Java had true garbage collection, most programs would delete themselves upon execution." -- Robert Sewell