Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 14:14:15 -1000 (HST) From: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@jroberson.net> To: Andrey Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux kernel compatability Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1101051413070.1450@desktop> In-Reply-To: <20110105175926.GA2101@vniz.net> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1101031017110.1450@desktop> <20110103220153.69cf59e0@kan.dnsalias.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1101031859290.1450@desktop> <20110104082252.45bb5e7f@kan.dnsalias.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1101041030120.1450@desktop> <20110105124045.6a0ddd1a@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110105175926.GA2101@vniz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, 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. I 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. Adobe 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 Flash > via emulator and got all its pain as result. There are not enough freebsd desktop users to justify the effort even if everyone of them sent an email in. I once offered to port recent vmware to BSD for free and they turned me down because they didn't want to deal with it. We have not been marginalized in this space because we have an emulator. We just don't have the marketshare in many areas. If anything, these emulators improve our marketshare. Thanks, Jeff > > BTW, I have nothing against having source level Linux compatibility in > some places, because resulting binary will be FreeBSD one in any case, but > I'm strongly against executable binary compatibility level. > > -- > http://ache.vniz.net/ >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1101051413070.1450>