On 12/4/2012 16:42, Martin wrote:
Don't get me wrong, i am not criticising pkgsrc or intentionally trying
get people offside.
So aside from the obvious differences and limitations (i.e. manpower,
design of each BSD system) What is stopping per say DragonflyBSD or any
other BSD from using package
Don't get me wrong, i am not criticising pkgsrc or intentionally trying get
people offside.
So aside from the obvious differences and limitations (i.e. manpower,
design of each BSD system) What is stopping per say DragonflyBSD or any
other BSD from using packages from FreeBSD or vice versa through
On 12/4/2012 16:07, Martin wrote:
Sorry forget that last message.
GNOME was a bad example, but you did in essence you clarify my point.
That FreeBSD or whichever one you talk about may or may not be using a
different pkgsrc branch.
I didn't call any components standardized, i said even if you _
Sorry forget that last message.
GNOME was a bad example, but you did in essence you clarify my point. That
FreeBSD or whichever one you talk about may or may not be using a different
pkgsrc branch.
I didn't call any components standardized, i said even if you *were* to
standardize certain compone
I understand that, what your not getting is that i am talking about the
release schedule of the individual BSD distros not the release schedule of
pkgsrc.
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 7:02 PM, John Marino wrote:
> On 12/4/2012 07:14, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
>
>> Martin>
>> writes:
>>
>> I can see how
On 12/4/2012 07:14, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
Martin writes:
I can see how you could misunderstand what i said.
My point was about that each of the BSD's use pkgsrc in a different way and
the releases from FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD or DflyBSD don't all rely on the
exact same packages for every re
-- Forwarded message --
From: Martin
Date: Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: Unified BSD?
To: Aleksej Saushev
I can see how you could misunderstand what i said.
My point was about that each of the BSD's use pkgsrc in a different way and
the releases from FreeBSD, N
On 2012-11-16, at 6:42 AM, Erich Dollansky
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 14:52:48 +0100
> Johnny Billquist wrote:
>
>> On 2012-11-16 12:48, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Hub- FreeBSD
>>> wrote:
Actually, according to what we are tracking at
On 2012-11-16, at 5:52 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2012-11-16 12:48, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Hub- FreeBSD wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, according to what we are tracking at http://bsdstats.org, there
>>> are currently *8*:
>>>
>>> PC-BSD
>>> FreeBSD
>>> PYC-BS
Hi,
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 14:52:48 +0100
Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2012-11-16 12:48, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Hub- FreeBSD
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Actually, according to what we are tracking at
> >> http://bsdstats.org, there are currently *8*:
> >>
> >> PC-BSD
> >
f each and create a
Unified BSD?
You'd end up creating a fifth.
At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list
___
freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, s
gt;
>>>>> Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four
>>>>> largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each
>>>>> and create a Unified BSD?
>>>>
>>>> You'd end up creating a fift
best bits and pieces out of each
>>>> and create a Unified BSD?
>>>
>>> You'd end up creating a fifth.
>> At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list.
>> Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility,
>>
pieces out of each and create a
Unified BSD?
You'd end up creating a fifth.
At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list.
Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility,
is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible
userlan
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 01:27:44PM +0100, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
> b) Besides - I question the notion of "unchanging" == "dead".
Amen!
Sometimes, you just don't need to be twiddling in the code for
your software to work.
___
freebsd-chat@freebsd.or
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 09:37:41PM +0100, Robin Bj?rklin wrote:
> Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest
> BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and
> create a Unified BSD?
Short answer: Yes.
Diversity breeds innovation.
I see your point. But again the problem arises of if you have one big fat
sign "BSD" which BSD are you developing for?
Without having at least a universal package management system if you don't
want each individual BSD developments to be porting drivers across.
Which i believe is already in place
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012, at 14:18, Martin wrote:
> My point is about the possibility of creating a new BSD project (with
> separate developers) that aims for 100% compatibility with at least
> FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD and maybe DragonflyBSD.
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012, at 22:43, matthew sporleder wrote:
>
10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin wrote:
Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD
variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a
Unified BSD?
You'd end up creating a
gest
> BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create
> a Unified BSD?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Robin Bjorklin
Model yourself after Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino who was involved in Net,
Open, and Free BSD.
If you are interested in generating linux-like "buzz
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Johnny Billquist wrote:
> > And what about 2BSD, BSD 3 and BSD 4 with all their releases?
> > (And I assume that there was probably something that in retrospect would
> > have been called 1BSD as well...)
> No they were sequential from same team, n
four
> > > largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each
> > > and create a Unified BSD?
> >
> >
> > You'd end up creating a fifth.
>
> At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirB
Joost van de Griek wrote:
> >> On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four
> >>> largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each
&
e. We don't need a
"unified" BSD; BSD is already unified in the ways that matter. Open source and
meritocracy see to that.
Tim
--
Tim Larson
Software Engineer
[Proxibid]<http://www.proxibid.com/>
e: tim.lar...@proxibid.com
p: 877-505-7770
d: 402-505-7770
This email and
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:45 AM, Ignatios Souvatzis
wrote:
> At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list.
> Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility,
> is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible
> userland, an eighth.
t; > > Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four
>> > > largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of
>> > > each and create a Unified BSD?
>> >
>> >
>> > You'd end up creating a fifth.
ver, i was assuming you were going of the core of the system
(i.e. how much source if any is used in kernel space).
Which brings be back to what i was talking about in an earlier post. If you
want to make a "unified BSD", it would be easier to create a new BSD which
at the core (i.e. memory
pieces out of each and create a
Unified BSD?
You'd end up creating a fifth.
At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list.
Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility,
is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible
use
mksh is certainly not, and I use it daily
on FreeBSD and really like it.
The same I could say about openntpd
from OpenBSD.
Isn't it like it should be then?
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Unified-BSD-tp5760356p5760566.html
Sent from the freebsd
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 01:04:27PM +0100, Lars Engels wrote:
> MirBSD / MirOS is dead:
>
> http://www.freshbsd.org/search?project=mirbsd
>
> Last commit: 2011-08-29 23:00:00
I'm no Mir* co-worker, so take this with a grain of salt. But on
general principles:
a) I question the date itself - th
four
> > > largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each
> > > and create a Unified BSD?
> >
> >
> > You'd end up creating a fifth.
>
> At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list.
> Also, you
s would get in under one roof?
>
> Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest
> BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and
> create a Unified BSD?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Robin Bjorklin
>
and
> > create a Unified BSD?
>
>
> You'd end up creating a fifth.
At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list.
Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility,
is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compati
On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin wrote:
> Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest
> BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create
> a Unified BSD?
You'd end up creating a fifth.
.tsooJ
--
The fi
> - Then came the Unix wars, where AT&T sued BSDI (a commercial variant
> that no longer exists) over perceived copyright infringement. The
> free BSDs weren't really directly involved, but the suit would have
> been just as relevant, and people were worried.
>
> This was the time that Li
roject to abandon years of work to start again
on a unified BSD.
It is a cool thought, one i have thought about.
Which is why i reckon your far more likely to get support for a new BSD
system that takes the foundation of one of the existing BSD's and create a
project that aims for compatibility bet
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> - Then DragonflyBSD split from FreeBSD. Mainly personality driven
> AFAICT. Again, this doesn't imply any criticism of the founder of
> the new project.
There were some very valid technical reasons at the time as well, IMHO.
___
for thinking it could be good to merge the four
> largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of
> each and create a Unified BSD?
Maybe not, but there are many reasons it won't happen. One is the
structure of the individual projects, and another is that the curren
You seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that the Linux
world is unified. It isn't.
The big difference between Linux and the BSDs is that it alienates
itself from the BSDs and many other projects by using a viral,
business-hostile license. The BSDs can draw on one another's work
beca
> Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four
> largest
> BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and
> create a Unified BSD?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Robin Bjorklin
>
___
freebsd-chat@fre
If there's to be any hope of a rational discussion, we need to remember to CC
each list as the OP did.
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012, Tony wrote:
>Ain't that what OpenBSD is though - the best from all worlds?
Especially with comments like these..
___
freebsd-c
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Robin Björklin
wrote:
>
>
> Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest
> BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and
> create a Unified BSD?
>
you are not crazy for thinking this, and
titive shape" is
ambiguous (competitive in speed?, portability?, security?, market
share?).
> Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest
> BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each an
some wifi drivers... etc).
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Unified-BSD-tp5760356p5760380.html
Sent from the freebsd-chat mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.f
Yes, your bat crap crazy :-)
All of these variants inherit from the same unified BSD 4.4 base code as far
as I know. So years ago there were reasons that groups wanted to spilt off
and focus on specific goals. Some of these goals are mutually exclusive.
These BSD variants are not really
me it seems *BSD would be in a more
competitive shape if all developers would get in under one roof?
Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest
BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and
create a Unified
46 matches
Mail list logo
