Hi,
I've just read the announcement of the merge of BSDI and Walnut Creek
CDROM. (March 10 2000).
I guess it's a sad day for FreeBSD. I can't imagine how a company selling
it's own BSD could at the same time let another BSD free.
Has the FreeBSD project become the test-bed for BSDI ? or
the
On Fri 2000-03-10 (11:02), Didier Derny wrote:
I've just read the announcement of the merge of BSDI and Walnut Creek
CDROM. (March 10 2000).
I guess it's a sad day for FreeBSD. I can't imagine how a company selling
it's own BSD could at the same time let another BSD free.
Let's hope your
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 11:02:38 GMT, Didier Derny wrote:
I've just read the announcement of the merge of BSDI and Walnut Creek
CDROM. (March 10 2000).
I guess it's a sad day for FreeBSD. I can't imagine how a company selling
it's own BSD could at the same time let another BSD free.
You're
hi, there!
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Didier Derny wrote:
I've just read the announcement of the merge of BSDI and Walnut Creek
CDROM. (March 10 2000).
I guess it's a sad day for FreeBSD. I can't imagine how a company selling
it's own BSD could at the same time let another BSD free.
Has the
Hi,
You're going to feel like a real idiot when you actually read the
announcement properly. Go back and read it through from beginning to
end. :-)
That is not fair, Sheldon. Didier has some concerns, and I cannot blame him.
I'm reassured by the comments that have been made, both here and
I doubt anyone would be interested in this, but we still have lots
of clients using 2.2.8 and have backported the xl driver from 3.3
to support the 3c905c card. If anyone is interested in this code let
me know.
--
Dr Graham WheelerE-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Director,
* Graham Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000310 05:22] wrote:
I doubt anyone would be interested in this, but we still have lots
of clients using 2.2.8 and have backported the xl driver from 3.3
to support the 3c905c card. If anyone is interested in this code let
me know.
Please do make it
At 02:27 PM 3/10/00 +0200, you wrote:
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 13:00:20 +0100, Johnathan Meehan wrote:
That is not fair, Sheldon. Didier has some concerns, and I cannot
blame him.
I guess what I wrote makes for a very harsh comment in isolation from
the grin I had on my face while I was typing.
As long as they keep their grubbly little hands off of it, and dont let the
ciscos and uunets of the world (who both own a piece of bsdi) dictate
policy, and as long as several key developers dont go work for BSDI (they
would have already if they were going to I think)it shouldnt be much
What are their alternatives? Think about how the world is waking up to
Open Source. Think about how companies are realizing that a small group
of paid engineers simply can't keep up with a world-wide organization of
contributors. What would you do if you didn't feel you could keep up?
Didier Derny wrote:
Hi,
I've just read the announcement of the merge of BSDI and Walnut Creek
CDROM. (March 10 2000).
I guess it's a sad day for FreeBSD. I can't imagine how a company selling
it's own BSD could at the same time let another BSD free.
Has the FreeBSD project become
.com/press/2310.mhtml you'll see the following:
"BSDI will continue to develop, enhance and distribute BSD/OS and FreeBSD
according to the terms of the business-friendly, unencumbered Berkeley
software license, which encourages development for open source software
projects, embedded syste
At 12:34 PM 3/10/00 -0500, you wrote:
What are their alternatives? Think about how the world is waking up to
Open Source. Think about how companies are realizing that a small group
of paid engineers simply can't keep up with a world-wide organization of
contributors. What would you do if
I fail to see how you can read anything bad into this announcement. If
you're really concerned, you have just as much right to the code as any
one else, feel free to take the 4.0 code base and create your own system.
BSDidier has a nice ring to it.
Personally, I've been running FreeBSD since
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
I fail to see how you can read anything bad into this announcement. If
you're really concerned, you have just as much right to the code as any
one else, feel free to take the 4.0 code base and create your own system.
BSDidier has a nice ring to it.
I fail to see how you can read anything bad into this announcement. If
you're really concerned, you have just as much right to the code as any
one else, feel free to take the 4.0 code base and create your own system.
BSDidier has a nice ring to it.
Personally, I've been running FreeBSD since
Hmm. That reminds me: I've also got a box with an onboard
8255X that isn't recognized. The relevant parts of "boot -v"
output are:
found- vendor=0x8086, dev=0x1209, revid=0x09
class=02-00-00, hdrtype=0x00, mfdev=0
subordinatebus=0secondarybus=0
intpin=a, irq=11
instead of NT. Instead of Linux. The existing BSD market is too small. They
have failed to convince the world that BSD is the answer. Outside of the
US. linux is totally dominant.
I'm not sure where you get your market demographics, but at least in Japan,
FreeBSD is on par with Linux in
Hmm. That reminds me: I've also got a box with an onboard
8255X that isn't recognized. The relevant parts of "boot -v"
output are:
found- vendor=0x8086, dev=0x1209, revid=0x09
class=02-00-00, hdrtype=0x00, mfdev=0
subordinatebus=0secondarybus=0
intpin=a, irq=11
Could somebody clear this up for me? If FreeBSD is still going to go along
doing what it does, then what happens if I write a device driver for
WhizzoNewProduct(TM), that the commercial side is developing as an "added
value feature"? Say, for example, I beat them to the punch. As pointed to
I wrote:
Hmm. That reminds me: I've also got a box with an onboard
8255X that isn't recognized. The relevant parts of "boot -v"
output are:
found- vendor=0x8086, dev=0x1209, revid=0x09
class=02-00-00, hdrtype=0x00, mfdev=0
subordinatebus=0secondarybus=0
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Didier Derny writes:
: I've been using FreeBSD since August 1994 (FreeBSD 1.1.5.1)
I think you are wrong. Dead wrong. This will allow the WC to pump
more money into the FreeBSD organization to fix some of the glaring
problems that we have now.
Warner
To
FreeBSD won't be dead until they pry the source code from our cold dead
fingers :-)
Seriously, as one of the people who saw the potential for FreeBSD in the
commercial world back in '94 just prior to the release of 2.0-BETA I
do have to say that this is "the next level" that FreeBSD must go to.
I guess it's a sad day for FreeBSD. I can't imagine how a company selling
it's own BSD could at the same time let another BSD free.
And I can't imagine how *anyone* could take this perspective given
any of the stuff they've read so far.
FreeBSD will remain, as I have gone to great pains to
"Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
[SNIP]
If you think it's possible to bend the FreeBSD project to anyone's
corporate will then you've never even come close to understanding who
we are or what we stand for. That's a shame since one would think 6
years to be more than enough time to gain such an
For the FreeBSD project :
- many more supported platforms (Sparc, PowerPC, Arm ?)
- better Intel SMP ?
- new developpers ?
- increased credibility via the support network of BSDi ?
Hopefully all of those things, though just days after the merger is no
time to be making promises either. All
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Didier Derny wrote:
Hi,
I've just read the announcement of the merge of BSDI and Walnut Creek
CDROM. (March 10 2000).
I guess it's a sad day for FreeBSD. I can't imagine how a company selling
it's own BSD could at the same time let another BSD free.
the
At 14:15 10.03.00 -0600, you wrote:
FreeBSD won't be dead until they pry the source code from our cold dead
fingers :-)
There are a lot of hardware companies that had invested substantially in
BSD 4.3 knockoffs and Mach kernel knockoffs. The natural upgrade path for
those development efforts
Dennis wrote:
Open Source is a lot of bunk. People want stuff that works. Linux is
growing in popularity because since 2.2 came out it actually works well.
Linux had the marketing in place and they are soaring. We sell 10 to 1
linux now. I was getting bloodied pushing FreeBSD. Its like
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 05:20:31PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
I'm pretty sure this can be done a hell of a lot easier by using shared
libraries and using the enviornment variables LD_LIBRARY_PATH and
LD_PRELOAD, see the rtld manpage for more
* Oscar Bonilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000310 15:19] wrote:
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 05:20:31PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
I'm pretty sure this can be done a hell of a lot easier by using shared
libraries and using the enviornment variables
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 03:27:37PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
I think you'll want LD_LIBRARY_PATH to be:
/home/obonilla/freebsd/nss/libc/:/usr/lib:/usr/local/lib
I don't see why since the only library I use is libc. Anyway, I tried
just for kicks and still got the same error.
$ echo
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Oscar Bonilla wrote:
$ cp Makefile.static Makefile
$ make
cc -g -DYP -DFreeBSD -Wall -pedantic -ansi -c -I../../libc/include nss-test.c
cc -g -nostdlib -static -L../../libc -o nss-test nss-test.o
../../csu/i386-elf/crt1.o ../../csu/i386-elf/crti.o -lc
$ ./nss-test
to try things out i create a static binary and coerce it to use my
C library instead of the system's one.
this is how i compile my program:
cc -g -DYP -DFreeBSD -Wall -pedantic -ansi -c -I../../libc/include nss-test.c
cc -g -nostdlib -static -L../../libc -o nss-test nss-test.o \
* Oscar Bonilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000310 16:00] wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 03:27:37PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
I think you'll want LD_LIBRARY_PATH to be:
/home/obonilla/freebsd/nss/libc/:/usr/lib:/usr/local/lib
I don't see why since the only library I use is libc. Anyway, I
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 06:51:20PM -0500, Chuck Robey wrote:
I wasn't reading this too closely, but if you're trying to hand feed in
the object files, the C startup object file *MUST* come first in the list
of object files, because it's gotta link at the lowest address ...
Is that it?
Ok,
At 2:27 PM +0200 3/10/00, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 13:00:20 +0100, Johnathan Meehan wrote:
That is not fair, Sheldon. Didier has some concerns, and I
cannot blame him.
I guess what I wrote makes for a very harsh comment in isolation
from the grin I had on my face while I was
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 04:35:18PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
It seems to be working just fine, I suspect that there's something wrong
with your code and you're referencing a function that somehow is not
being compiled into libc:
~ % nm /usr/lib/libc.a | grep nsdispatch
~ %
is this
* Oscar Bonilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000310 17:08] wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 04:35:18PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
It seems to be working just fine, I suspect that there's something wrong
with your code and you're referencing a function that somehow is not
being compiled into libc:
On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 12:58:13AM +0100, Marco van de Voort wrote:
to try things out i create a static binary and coerce it to use my
C library instead of the system's one.
this is how i compile my program:
cc -g -DYP -DFreeBSD -Wall -pedantic -ansi -c -I../../libc/include
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 07:49:32PM -0500, Chuck Robey wrote:
Notice here the order it links, and what files it links in. First, if
you're using nostdlib, then you have to call out your own libs, all of
them, and you forgot to do libgcc. I've been able to move the lib calls
I don't really
Will there be some kind of "business-like" presentation of all the
goodies which will comme from this merge of codebases ? (BSD-mergemania
for Dummies (TM) ?)
I really couldn't say at this stage. Hopefully? :)
- Jordan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 12:34:58PM -0500, Michael Bacarella wrote:
A BSDI represenative tried for days to convince me over the phone why I
should pay for BSD/OS even though FreeBSD was free, or at least a CD
order away, and FreeBSD even has source code.
I asked about why we should buy a
I'm sorry Dennis but I find it a bit difficult to swallow
your assessment of other people's business acumen and
their ability to relate to markets.
The race isn't over yet, hell everybody's just warming up :-)
--
Jerry Hicks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
44 matches
Mail list logo
