Blobs

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Hi!

It is written in article "Explaining Why We Don't Endorse Other Systems of
gnu.org:

"BSD systems

FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD all include instructions for obtaining nonfree
programs in their ports system. In addition, their kernels include nonfree
firmware blobs.

Nonfree firmware programs used with Linux, the kernel, are called “blobs”,
and that's how we use the term. In BSD parlance, the term “blob” means
something else: a nonfree driver. OpenBSD and perhaps other BSD
distributions (called “projects” by BSD developers) have the policy of not
including those. That is the right policy, as regards drivers; but when the
developers say these distributions “contain no blobs”, it causes a
misunderstanding. They are not talking about firmware blobs.

None of those BSD distributions has policies against proprietary
binary-only firmware that might be loaded even by free drivers."

Reference of article "Explaining Why We Don't Endorse Other Systems of
gnu.org: https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.en.html

Is it true that OpenBSD include instructions for obtaining nonfree programs
in their ports system?

Is it true that none of those BSD distributions has policies against
proprietary binary-only firmware that might be loaded even by free drivers?

It is written in LibertyBSD website:

"However, OpenBSD ships with several pieces of non-free, binary only
firmware  in
the base system, and depending on the hardware detected, by default a
script will download more at first boot
,
without informing the user."

Reference of LibertyBSD website: https://libertybsd.net

Is it true that OpenBSD ships with several pieces of non-free, binary only
firmware  in
the base system?

When Free Software Foundation will remove the Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre of the page that lists the GNU/Linux distributions that are entirely free as in freedom?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Hi Free Software Foundation!

It is written in article "Free GNU/Linux distributions":

"Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre, a long-term support simplicity-focused
distribution based on Arch GNU/Linux."

Reference: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html

Free Software Foundation,

Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre is not free because is changing to BSD.

References:

https://www.hyperbola.info/news/announcing-hyperbolabsd-roadmap/

https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic.php?id=315

Free Software Foundation,

The Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre is still in list of Free GNU/Linux
distributions.

Will Free Software Foundation remove the Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre of the page
that lists the GNU/Linux 
distributions
that are entirely free  as in
freedom?

If yes, when Free Software Foundation will remove the Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre
of the page that lists the GNU/Linux
 distributions that are
entirely free  as in freedom?

Will Free Software Foundation remove the Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre of the page that lists the GNU/Linux distributions that are entirely free as in freedom?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Hi Free Software Foundation!

It is written in article "Free GNU/Linux distributions":

"Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre, a long-term support simplicity-focused
distribution based on Arch GNU/Linux."

Reference: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html

Free Software Foundation,

Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre is not free because is changing to BSD.

References:

https://www.hyperbola.info/news/announcing-hyperbolabsd-roadmap/

https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic.php?id=315

Free Software Foundation,

The Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre is still in list of Free GNU/Linux
distributions.

Will Free Software Foundation remove the Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre of the page
that lists the GNU/Linux 
distributions
that are entirely free  as in
freedom?

If not, why Free Software Foundation will not remove the Hyperbola
GNU/Linux-libre
of the page that lists the GNU/Linux
 distributions that are
entirely free  as in freedom?

Re: Hyperbola Gnu Linux changing to Bsd

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Em seg, 30 de dez de 2019 00:59, SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 
escreveu:

> Hi!
>
> It is written in article  Free GNU/Linux distributions:
>
> "If one of these distros ever does include or propose anything nonfree,
> that must have happened by mistake, and the developers are committed to
> removing it. If you find nonfree software or documentation in one of these
> distributions, you can report the problem, and earn GNU Bucks
> <https://www.gnu.org/help/gnu-bucks.html>, while we inform the developers
> so they can fix the problem."
>
> Reference: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html
>
> Hyperbola Gnu Linux changing to Bsd:
>
> Announcing HyperbolaBSD Roadmap
>
> 2019-12-21 - Luke R.
>
> Due to the Linux kernel rapidly proceeding down an unstable path, we are
> planning on implementing *a completely new OS derived from several BSD
> implementations*.
>
> This was not an easy decision to make, but we wish to use our time and
> resources to create a viable alternative to the current operating system
> trends which are actively seeking to undermine user choice and freedom.
>
> *This will not be a "distro"*, but a hard fork of the OpenBSD kernel and
> userspace including new code written under GPLv3 and LGPLv3 to replace 
> GPL-incompatible
> parts
> <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses>
>  and non-free ones
> <https://notabug.org/jadedctrl/libertybsd-scripts-mirror/issues/5>.
>
> Reasons for this include:
>
>- Linux kernel forcing adaption of DRM, including HDCP
><https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10084131/>.
>- Linux kernel proposed usage of Rust
><https://lwn.net/Articles/797828/> (which contains freedom flaws
><https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:main:rusts_freedom_flaws> and
>a centralized code repository that is more prone to cyber attack and
>generally requires internet access to use.)
>- Linux kernel being written without security and in mind. (KSPP is
>basically a dead project and Grsec is no longer free software)
>- Many GNU userspace and core utils are all forcing adaption of
>features without build time options to disable them. E.g. (PulseAudio
><https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=659338> / SystemD / Rust
>
> <https://www.infoworld.com/article/3165424/mozilla-binds-firefoxs-fate-to-the-rust-language.html>
> / Java <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitem&item_id=57217> as
>forced dependencies)
>
> As such, we will continue to *support the Milky Way branch until 2022* when
> our legacy Linux-libre kernel reaches End of Life.
>
> Future versions of Hyperbola will be using HyperbolaBSD which will have
> the *new kernel, userspace and not be ABI compatible with previous
> versions*.
>
> *HyperbolaBSD is intended to be modular and minimalist* so other projects
> will be able to re-use the code under free license.
>
>
> References:
>
> https://www.hyperbola.info/news/announcing-hyperbolabsd-roadmap/
>
> https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic.php?id=315
>
> Hiperbola GNU/Linux is not free!
>
> It is all!
>
What is the opinion of the Theo de Raadt about Hiperbola GNU/Linux and
Hiperbola
BSD?

>

Re: Hyperbola Gnu Linux changing to Bsd

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Em seg, 30 de dez de 2019 00:59, SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 
escreveu:

> Hi!
>
> It is written in article  Free GNU/Linux distributions:
>
> "If one of these distros ever does include or propose anything nonfree,
> that must have happened by mistake, and the developers are committed to
> removing it. If you find nonfree software or documentation in one of these
> distributions, you can report the problem, and earn GNU Bucks
> <https://www.gnu.org/help/gnu-bucks.html>, while we inform the developers
> so they can fix the problem."
>
> Reference: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html
>
> Hyperbola Gnu Linux changing to Bsd:
>
> Announcing HyperbolaBSD Roadmap
>
> 2019-12-21 - Luke R.
>
> Due to the Linux kernel rapidly proceeding down an unstable path, we are
> planning on implementing *a completely new OS derived from several BSD
> implementations*.
>
> This was not an easy decision to make, but we wish to use our time and
> resources to create a viable alternative to the current operating system
> trends which are actively seeking to undermine user choice and freedom.
>
> *This will not be a "distro"*, but a hard fork of the OpenBSD kernel and
> userspace including new code written under GPLv3 and LGPLv3 to replace 
> GPL-incompatible
> parts
> <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses>
>  and non-free ones
> <https://notabug.org/jadedctrl/libertybsd-scripts-mirror/issues/5>.
>
> Reasons for this include:
>
>- Linux kernel forcing adaption of DRM, including HDCP
><https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10084131/>.
>- Linux kernel proposed usage of Rust
><https://lwn.net/Articles/797828/> (which contains freedom flaws
><https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:main:rusts_freedom_flaws> and
>a centralized code repository that is more prone to cyber attack and
>generally requires internet access to use.)
>- Linux kernel being written without security and in mind. (KSPP is
>basically a dead project and Grsec is no longer free software)
>- Many GNU userspace and core utils are all forcing adaption of
>features without build time options to disable them. E.g. (PulseAudio
><https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=659338> / SystemD / Rust
>
> <https://www.infoworld.com/article/3165424/mozilla-binds-firefoxs-fate-to-the-rust-language.html>
> / Java <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitem&item_id=57217> as
>forced dependencies)
>
> As such, we will continue to *support the Milky Way branch until 2022* when
> our legacy Linux-libre kernel reaches End of Life.
>
> Future versions of Hyperbola will be using HyperbolaBSD which will have
> the *new kernel, userspace and not be ABI compatible with previous
> versions*.
>
> *HyperbolaBSD is intended to be modular and minimalist* so other projects
> will be able to re-use the code under free license.
>
>
> References:
>
> https://www.hyperbola.info/news/announcing-hyperbolabsd-roadmap/
>
> https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic.php?id=315
>
> Hiperbola GNU/Linux is not free!
>
> It is all!
>

What are the opinions of the OpenBSD developers about Hiperbola GNU/Linux?

>

Hyperbola Gnu Linux changing to Bsd

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Hi!

It is written in article  Free GNU/Linux distributions:

"If one of these distros ever does include or propose anything nonfree,
that must have happened by mistake, and the developers are committed to
removing it. If you find nonfree software or documentation in one of these
distributions, you can report the problem, and earn GNU Bucks
, while we inform the developers
so they can fix the problem."

Reference: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html

Hyperbola Gnu Linux changing to Bsd:

Announcing HyperbolaBSD Roadmap

2019-12-21 - Luke R.

Due to the Linux kernel rapidly proceeding down an unstable path, we are
planning on implementing *a completely new OS derived from several BSD
implementations*.

This was not an easy decision to make, but we wish to use our time and
resources to create a viable alternative to the current operating system
trends which are actively seeking to undermine user choice and freedom.

*This will not be a "distro"*, but a hard fork of the OpenBSD kernel and
userspace including new code written under GPLv3 and LGPLv3 to replace
GPL-incompatible
parts

 and non-free ones
.

Reasons for this include:

   - Linux kernel forcing adaption of DRM, including HDCP
   .
   - Linux kernel proposed usage of Rust
 (which
   contains freedom flaws
    and
   a centralized code repository that is more prone to cyber attack and
   generally requires internet access to use.)
   - Linux kernel being written without security and in mind. (KSPP is
   basically a dead project and Grsec is no longer free software)
   - Many GNU userspace and core utils are all forcing adaption of features
   without build time options to disable them. E.g. (PulseAudio
    / SystemD / Rust
   

/ Java  as
   forced dependencies)

As such, we will continue to *support the Milky Way branch until 2022* when
our legacy Linux-libre kernel reaches End of Life.

Future versions of Hyperbola will be using HyperbolaBSD which will
have the *new
kernel, userspace and not be ABI compatible with previous versions*.

*HyperbolaBSD is intended to be modular and minimalist* so other projects
will be able to re-use the code under free license.


References:

https://www.hyperbola.info/news/announcing-hyperbolabsd-roadmap/

https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic.php?id=315

Hiperbola GNU/Linux is not free!

It is all!

Re: Did I install correctly the openbsd?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Will others answer to this topic?

Theo de Raadt and others,

I tried to install the OpenBSD according to the following video:

https://youtu.be/8lqISJFB3ak

Theo de Raadt and others

What are your opinions about the video that I quoted above?

Did I install correctly the openbsd?


Em qua, 10 de jul de 2019 07:59, Janne Johansson 
escreveu:

> Den ons 10 juli 2019 kl 02:16 skrev SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 <
> soulofroo...@gmail.com>:
>
>> I installed openbsd 6.5 in Virtualbox for Windows 7, the following
>> screenshots show it:
>> I tried to install openbsd according to the following video:
>> Did I install correctly the openbsd?
>>
>
> Good tip on reporting when things didn't go as planned:
> "What did you do, what did you expect would happen, and what happened
> instead"
> Try that next time.
>
> --
> May the most significant bit of your life be positive.
>

Re: DragonFly 5.0 released!

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

My inspiration for posting here is the following topic:

https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/62876/

Em quinta-feira, 19 de outubro de 2017, SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 <
soulofroo...@gmail.com> escreveu:

>
> https://marc.info/?l=dragonfly-users&m=150816781917465&w=2
>
> This release features HAMMER2 file system as a technology preview enabled
> in the default generic kernel.
>
> Code:
>
> dfly# uname -a
> DragonFly dfly.bagdala2.net 5.0-RELEASE DragonFly v5.0.0.2.ga9d62-RELEASE
> #10: Tue Oct 17 07:25:14 EDT 2017 
> r...@dfly.bagdala2.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/X86_64_GENERIC
>  x86_64
>
>
>
> Code:
>
> dfly# gpt -v create /dev/da3
> dfly# gpt create: /dev/da3: mediasize=500107862016; sectorsize=512;
> blocks=976773168
> dfly# gpt add -b 34 -i 0 -s 990 /dev/da3
> dfly# gpt add -b 1024 -i 1 -s * /dev/da3
> dfly# gpt -v show /dev/da3
> gpt show: /dev/da3: mediasize=500107862016; sectorsize=512;
> blocks=976773168
>  start   size  index  contents
>  0  1  -  PMBR
>  1  1  -  Pri GPT header
>  2 32  -  Pri GPT table
> 34990  0  GPT part - DragonFly Label64
>   1024  976772111  1  GPT part - DragonFly Label64
>  976773135 32  -  Sec GPT table
>  976773167  1  -  Sec GPT header
>
> dfly# disklabel64 -rw da3s1 auto
> dfly# disklabel64 -e da3s1
>
> dfly# newfs_hammer2  /dev/da3s1e
> newfs_hammer2: WARNING: HAMMER2 VFS not loaded, cannot get version info.
> Using version 1
> Volume /dev/da3s1e size 465.76GB
> -
> version:  1
> total-size:   465.76GB (500103643136 bytes)
> boot-area-size:64.00MB
> aux-area-size:256.00MB
> topo-reserved:  1.82GB
> free-space:   463.62GB
> vol-fsid: 442a0c12-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
> sup-clid: 442a0c25-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
> sup-fsid: 442a0c30-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
> PFS "LOCAL"
>clid 4430a88b-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
>fsid 4430a89f-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
> PFS "DATA"
>clid 4430a8da-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
>fsid 4430a8ea-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
>
>
>
> Code:
>
> dfly# mount
> ROOT on / (hammer, noatime, local)
> devfs on /dev (devfs, nosymfollow, local)
> /dev/serno/B620550018.s1a on /boot (ufs, local)
> /pfs/@@-1:1 on /var (null, local)
> /pfs/@@-1:2 on /tmp (null, local)
> /pfs/@@-1:3 on /home (null, local)
> /pfs/@@-1:4 on /usr/obj (null, local)
> /pfs/@@-1:5 on /var/crash (null, local)
> /pfs/@@-1:6 on /var/tmp (null, local)
> procfs on /proc (procfs, local)
> DATA on /data (hammer, noatime, local)
> BACKUP on /backup (hammer, noatime, local)
> /data/pfs/@@-1:1 on /data/backups (null, local)
> /data/pfs/@@-1:2 on /data/nfs (null, NFS exported, local)
> /dev/da3s1e@DATA on /test-hammer2 (hammer2, local)

DragonFly 5.0 released!

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

https://marc.info/?l=dragonfly-users&m=150816781917465&w=2

This release features HAMMER2 file system as a technology preview enabled
in the default generic kernel.

Code:

dfly# uname -a
DragonFly dfly.bagdala2.net 5.0-RELEASE DragonFly v5.0.0.2.ga9d62-RELEASE
#10: Tue Oct 17 07:25:14 EDT 2017
r...@dfly.bagdala2.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/X86_64_GENERIC
 x86_64



Code:

dfly# gpt -v create /dev/da3
dfly# gpt create: /dev/da3: mediasize=500107862016; sectorsize=512;
blocks=976773168
dfly# gpt add -b 34 -i 0 -s 990 /dev/da3
dfly# gpt add -b 1024 -i 1 -s * /dev/da3
dfly# gpt -v show /dev/da3
gpt show: /dev/da3: mediasize=500107862016; sectorsize=512; blocks=976773168
 start   size  index  contents
 0  1  -  PMBR
 1  1  -  Pri GPT header
 2 32  -  Pri GPT table
34990  0  GPT part - DragonFly Label64
  1024  976772111  1  GPT part - DragonFly Label64
 976773135 32  -  Sec GPT table
 976773167  1  -  Sec GPT header

dfly# disklabel64 -rw da3s1 auto
dfly# disklabel64 -e da3s1

dfly# newfs_hammer2  /dev/da3s1e
newfs_hammer2: WARNING: HAMMER2 VFS not loaded, cannot get version info.
Using version 1
Volume /dev/da3s1e size 465.76GB
-
version:  1
total-size:   465.76GB (500103643136 bytes)
boot-area-size:64.00MB
aux-area-size:256.00MB
topo-reserved:  1.82GB
free-space:   463.62GB
vol-fsid: 442a0c12-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
sup-clid: 442a0c25-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
sup-fsid: 442a0c30-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
PFS "LOCAL"
   clid 4430a88b-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
   fsid 4430a89f-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
PFS "DATA"
   clid 4430a8da-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35
   fsid 4430a8ea-b33a-11e7-a8ce-b9aeed3cce35



Code:

dfly# mount
ROOT on / (hammer, noatime, local)
devfs on /dev (devfs, nosymfollow, local)
/dev/serno/B620550018.s1a on /boot (ufs, local)
/pfs/@@-1:1 on /var (null, local)
/pfs/@@-1:2 on /tmp (null, local)
/pfs/@@-1:3 on /home (null, local)
/pfs/@@-1:4 on /usr/obj (null, local)
/pfs/@@-1:5 on /var/crash (null, local)
/pfs/@@-1:6 on /var/tmp (null, local)
procfs on /proc (procfs, local)
DATA on /data (hammer, noatime, local)
BACKUP on /backup (hammer, noatime, local)
/data/pfs/@@-1:1 on /data/backups (null, local)
/data/pfs/@@-1:2 on /data/nfs (null, NFS exported, local)
/dev/da3s1e@DATA on /test-hammer2 (hammer2, local)

NetBSD-based system using MINIX3 microkernel announced by Andy Tanenbaum

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

When most were thinking MINIX and its microkernel had never and were still
nowhere going, due to all the reasons many would argue about, today I went
for the first time ever to the Distrowatch's week news appendix:

- http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=current#news

and fate wanted me to bump into this:

-
http://theembeddedboard.review/a-reimplementation-of-netbsd-using-a-microkernel-part-1-of-2/

I would have never thought that Tanenbaum were still playing a starring
role into MINIX developing, neither that he would have eventually tried to
exploit BSD.

Re: No Blog without Puffy in FreeBSD Forums

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

What are the operating
systems that ship without blobs?

Em quarta-feira, 2 de agosto de 2017, SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 <
soulofroo...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Sorry
>
> No Blob without Puffy
>
> Em quarta-feira, 2 de agosto de 2017, SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 <
soulofroo...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>> Theo de Raadt said in the past:
>>
>> "3. mail from Theo, 12.03.2007 03:00:
>>
>> Did you even think about the fact that there are only two operating
>> systems that ship without blobs?
>>
>> OpenBSD
>>
>> Debian (and derived systems)"
>>
>>
>> "> > You claim you don't get any support from the other BSDs and now a
>>> > group of other BSD-users starts that campaign and you complain.
>>> > Where's the beef?
>>
>> You are not one of "the other BSDs". Your campaign will not support
>> more documentation. It puts the name of BLOB-including operating
>> systems on a poster saying that they are anti-blob. That's a bald
>> lie, and it undermines our effort.
>>
>> OpenBSD distinguishes itself on the fact that it does not include
>> blobs. Most other operating systems are completely fine with
>> incorporating blobs. The other projects you are showing on the poster
>> specifically include blobs. They do NOT help us get documentation."
>>
>> reference:
http://openbsd-archive.7691.n7.nabble.com/No-Blob-without-Puffy-td36562.html
>>
>> I wonder:
>>
>> Did you even think about the fact that there are only two operating
>> systems that ship without blobs?
>>
>> OpenBSD still distinguishes itself on the fact that it does not include
>> blobs?
>>
>> I posted this topic also in FreeBSD Forums:
>> https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/61858/
>>
>> I wonder what Theo de Raadt  would say about it.
>>
>> Thank you
>>

Re: No Blog without Puffy in FreeBSD Forums

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Sorry

No Blob without Puffy

Em quarta-feira, 2 de agosto de 2017, SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 <
soulofroo...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Theo de Raadt said in the past:
>
> "3. mail from Theo, 12.03.2007 03:00:
>
> Did you even think about the fact that there are only two operating
> systems that ship without blobs?
>
> OpenBSD
>
> Debian (and derived systems)"
>
>
> "> > You claim you don't get any support from the other BSDs and now a
>> > group of other BSD-users starts that campaign and you complain.
>> > Where's the beef?
>
> You are not one of "the other BSDs". Your campaign will not support
> more documentation. It puts the name of BLOB-including operating
> systems on a poster saying that they are anti-blob. That's a bald
> lie, and it undermines our effort.
>
> OpenBSD distinguishes itself on the fact that it does not include
> blobs. Most other operating systems are completely fine with
> incorporating blobs. The other projects you are showing on the poster
> specifically include blobs. They do NOT help us get documentation."
>
> reference:
http://openbsd-archive.7691.n7.nabble.com/No-Blob-without-Puffy-td36562.html
>
> I wonder:
>
> Did you even think about the fact that there are only two operating
> systems that ship without blobs?
>
> OpenBSD still distinguishes itself on the fact that it does not include
> blobs?
>
> I posted this topic also in FreeBSD Forums:
> https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/61858/
>
> I wonder what Theo de Raadt  would say about it.
>
> Thank you
>

No Blog without Puffy in FreeBSD Forums

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Theo de Raadt said in the past:

"3. mail from Theo, 12.03.2007 03:00:

Did you even think about the fact that there are only two operating
systems that ship without blobs?

OpenBSD

Debian (and derived systems)"


"> > You claim you don't get any support from the other BSDs and now a
> > group of other BSD-users starts that campaign and you complain.
> > Where's the beef?

You are not one of "the other BSDs". Your campaign will not support
more documentation. It puts the name of BLOB-including operating
systems on a poster saying that they are anti-blob. That's a bald
lie, and it undermines our effort.

OpenBSD distinguishes itself on the fact that it does not include
blobs. Most other operating systems are completely fine with
incorporating blobs. The other projects you are showing on the poster
specifically include blobs. They do NOT help us get documentation."

reference: 
http://openbsd-archive.7691.n7.nabble.com/No-Blob-without-Puffy-td36562.html

I wonder:

Did you even think about the fact that there are only two operating
systems that ship without blobs?

OpenBSD still distinguishes itself on the fact that it does not include
blobs?

I posted this topic also in FreeBSD Forums:
https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/61858/

I wonder what Theo de Raadt  would say about it.

Thank you

Doubts about the successors of OpenBSD leadership and development

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Who will succeed Theo de Raadt in the leadership and development of OpenBSD?

Can I succeed Theo de Raadt in the leadership and development of OpenBSD?

Theo de Raadt no responds to me private message since I told him that I do
not understand English.

Can I use OpenBSD in a virtual machine, for example, VirtualBox?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Can I use OpenBSD in a virtual machine, for example, VirtualBox?

Can I use OpenBSD as a desktop system?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Can I use OpenBSD as a desktop system?

Theo opinion of virtual machines

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Theo de Raadt said in the past about virtual machines:

>A few of us just spent some time again debugging an application level
>problem ... and once again realized that the application was running
>on OpenBSD inside the Innobox's VirtualBox VM.

>Argh.

>http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/639

>Sun owns InnoTek now because I think they wanted a VM product, but
the product is badly broken.

>When that VM is running, we end up with bugs that make it quite
>clear that cpu registers are being corrupted in some instances.

>We don't know how other operating system products continue running
>when the userland ecx register gets clobbered on a return from a page
>fault, but at least people should be aware that there is likely some
>security risk from running that product.

>That VM does not emulate the x86 correctly, (either).

>In the last while, approximately one third of x86 (i386/amd64) dmesg's
>are from VM's.

>This is annoying, because VM's to some extent make the base machines
>so much more uniform, so these are not the best test results for us to
>see.  We've had to make changes to a lot of drivers to cope with the
>VM's having bugs.

>This massive move towards VM use is a worrying trend and I am scared
>of the side effects we will face from so many people (essentially)
>choosing to run 3 operating systems instead of 1 ... and doing this
>when their guest choice is 'OpenBSD for security'.  I really wonder
>how people arrive at such a position... without logic or technological
>understanding, I suppose.

I would like to know what does Theo think about virtual machines. Just
curiosity.

Theo de Raadt and official developers of OpenBSD, please follow the "heart of the letters"!

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Theo de Raadt and official developers of OpenBSD, please follow the "heart
of the letters"!

What is up with some free software providers?! They say "Here's something
free! Oh wait, I changed my mind."

David Dawes worked for years with a team of developers to make a free
X11 distribution for us to use, called XFree86, 98% of which was based on
entirely free code from MIT. Suddenly, one day, he decided that we must
give him more credit (ie. advertise his name) or stop using it. Within
about 4 months every project had told him to get stuffed, and the community
has created a replacement effort. Now his team cannot even keep their web
pages up to date...

OpenBSD was the first operating system to integrate a packet filter,
and it was the ipf codebase from Darren Reed that we chose. But a few years
later he told us that we were not free to make changes to the code. So we
deleted ipf, and our new packet filter far exceeds the capabilities of the
one he wrote. And other projects are switching too...

The Apache group started from the humble beginnings of just being 'a
patchy' set of changes to a completely free web server of dubious quality.
But the years have changed them, and what they supply is now quite
non-free... released under a license so entangled in legalese that we have
absolutely no doubt that there are encumbrances hidden within. Legal terms
protect. Who are they protecting? Not your freedom.

reference: https://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#36

What are the others groups who have made this Free-to-Non-Free transition
before and after the existence of OpenBSD?

Re: Microsoft announced it is joining The Linux Foundation

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Microsoft joins The Linux Foundation as a Platinum member


reference:
http://venturebeat.com/2016/11/16/microsoft-joins-the-linux-foundation-as-a-p
latinum-member/

2016-11-16 20:21 GMT-03:00 SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 :

> At its Connect(); 2016 developer event in New York City today, Microsoft
> announced it is joining The Linux Foundation. And the company isn’t
joining
> just to say it did: Microsoft is joining at the Platinum level, the highest
> level of membership, which costs $500,000 annually. John Gossman, architect
> on the Microsoft Azure team, will sit on the foundation’s Board of
> Directors and help underwrite projects.
>
> Can this be?  Microsoft announced it is joining The Linux Foundation

Microsoft announced it is joining The Linux Foundation

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

At its Connect(); 2016 developer event in New York City today, Microsoft
announced it is joining The Linux Foundation. And the company isn’t joining
just to say it did: Microsoft is joining at the Platinum level, the highest
level of membership, which costs $500,000 annually. John Gossman, architect
on the Microsoft Azure team, will sit on the foundation’s Board of
Directors and help underwrite projects.

Can this be?  Microsoft announced it is joining The Linux Foundation

Because in this day and age, there’s no one else doing what OpenBSD is doing?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Theo de Raadt wrote:

"The first thing to recognize about OpenBSD is that there are about 80
developers and we do OpenBSD for ourselves only. Lots of other people use
OpenBSD, but we use it for ourselves. It’s just for ourselves–and that
means I want OpenBSD to run on everything I’ve got. I want OpenBSD to work
no matter what things come along in the future. This means that we have to
have an outside community that will help us with supporting new devices and
new technologies. We can’t be too ‘fringe.’ So that means we have to
have a
user community. But we have a user community only because it benefits us,
ourselves.

Then along come all of our users, and it turns out that many of our users
are much like us; they have the same needs as us. We don’t particularly
care that they have the same needs, but it’s sort of cool.

The result is that we end up with additional support because of them. Some
of them write device drivers, or some of them create pressure against
vendors and then things become free. And in the end, the whole goal is that
we can keep on running on stuff that is completely open so that we can see
it so that we can check it.

In this day and age, there’s no one else doing what we’re doing. FreeBSD
is
not doing this; they’re incorporating binary device drivers all the way
through their tree now when it’s more convenient. They’re saying
convenience over freedom. The Linux people are now the kings of loadable
device drivers, from all sorts of vendors. If OpenBSD stops doing this, I
would basically bet that within five years from now there wouldn’t be
anybody trying to write a completely free operating system because it would
not be possible."

reference:
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/1415548-interview-theo-de-raadt-on-industry-a
nd-free-so
*ftwar*e

*/*
*Because in this day and age, there’s no one else doing what OpenBSD is
doing?*


I wonder what Theo de Raadt would say about it.

Thank you

What is the difference between the security of HardenedBSD, security of FreeBSD, security of NetBSD, security of OpenBSD and security of DragonflyBSD?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Sorry for this question:

What is the difference between the security of HardenedBSD, security of
FreeBSD, security of NetBSD, security of OpenBSD and security of
DragonflyBSD?

Thank you

Re: Bitcoin of Romanian still saves OpenBSD?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

2016-10-31 16:50 GMT-02:00 SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 :

> Bitcoin of Romanian still saves OpenBSD?
>


Neither the Theo de Raadt will respond?

He sent me various private messages.

He is very gracious and patient.

Bitcoin of Romanian still saves OpenBSD?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Bitcoin of Romanian still saves OpenBSD?

Code of OpenBSD can be included in KolibriOS?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

It has come to my attention that NetBSD is not related to Kolibri somehow.

Reference: http://board.kolibrios.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&p=66746#p66745



Code of OpenBSD can be included in KolibriOS?

Re: Because Theo de Raadt said that the buttons are for idiots?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Because nobody answer?

2016-10-18 18:45 GMT-02:00 SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 :

> Because Theo de Raadt said that the buttons are for idiots?
>
>  http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/mg/
> Attic/theo.c?rev=1.125
>
> Peoples that participate in IRC of openbsd-br suggested for me ask this
> here in openbsd misc and for the Theo de Raadt.

Because Theo de Raadt said that the buttons are for idiots?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

Because Theo de Raadt said that the buttons are for idiots?


http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/mg/Attic/theo.c?rev=1.125

Peoples that participate in IRC of openbsd-br suggested for me ask this
here in openbsd misc and for the Theo de Raadt.

What is the opinion of Theo de Raadt about translation tools?

[SOUL_OF_ROOT 55]

PC-BSD still uses Pootle? https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/44595/

Pootle translates well or sometimes translates incorrect?

Pootle translates better than Google Translator?

I uses Google Translator, but if is true that Pootle translates better than
Google Translator, I will try use Pootle. [image: Wink]

What is the opinion of Theo de Raadt about translation tools?

For example, about Pootle,  DocBook XML, Command-line tools like
*textproc/itstool*  might.