On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 09:39:11PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote: > On Mon, 18 May 2020 08:57:39 -0700 > Ian Zimmerman <i...@very.loosely.org> wrote: > > > On 2020-05-18 16:42, Didier Kryn wrote: > > > > > In particular by porting Window$ on top of Systemd-Gnu-Linux, just > > > like MacOS lives on top of FreeBSD and makes big profit. > > > > How would that work from the legal POV? Linux is still GPL, pretty > > much for this very reason. > > > > I do believe that systemd was meant to be more than init from the > > start, but I'm not going as far as Didier. > > I am. I eschew Occam's Razor in favor of Litt's Razor, which can be > paraphrased "Follow the money." > > As one piece of evidence I present the words of a Redhat exec long > before systemd existed: > > http://asay.blogspot.com/2006/10/interview-with-red-hat-cto-brian.html > > Search the word "complexity" to get right to the piece of evidence that > Redhat profits from complexifying Linux. >
Specifically, it says: "Do you think the Red Hat model would apply equally well to other areas of software? " " Red Hat's model works because of the complexity of the technology we work with. An operating platform has a lot of moving parts, and customers are willing to pay to be insulated from that complexity. " " I don't think you can take one finite element - like Apache - and make a business out of it [using our model]. You need product complexity. Presumably Steve Litt's point is that Red Hat has to make the internals complex so that there's complexity to shield the costomer from. -- hendrik > SteveT > > Steve Litt > May 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques > of the Successful Technologist > http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques > _______________________________________________ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
