Talk:OpenBSD/Archive 1

OSSs lacking info
Big fun time.

It seems that pages related to free, open source operating systems aren't that informative. It's all well and good to have basic stuff like histories of projects, but sometimes I think it'd be nice to have details regarding the capabilities, and future directions of the various systems. I am doing what I can, but it's a really big job. Check out the new "string cleaning" stuff on this page for an example of something that might be better handled by a full-time programmer. --MJA

OpenBSD Criticisms
OpenBSD is sometimes critisized for using Solaris on their main webserver. --Krik 09:19, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Only by those who haven't troubled to read the FAQ: Why does www.openbsd.org run on Solaris?. I don't think that constitutes a criticism worth reporting. --Penfold 13:19, 2004 Apr 30 (UTC)


 * In other words, they aren't running Solaris on their servers, but the people who host OpenBSD do, right? -- Maru Dubshinki


 * Meaning that a university with a lot of bandwidth is willing to host the OpenBSD website for them. Janizary 20:33, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Logo Permissions
Theo de Raadt gave me a permission to include a picture with OpenBSD logo. Click "Sloven?&#269;ina" at the main article to se it --193.2.136.41 12:57, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

Deletion
Why was the information regarding K&R->ANSI conversion reverted? I don't think removing people's work without reason is beneficial. --Generic Player


 * I'm guessing it came across as a subtle dig at other OSS/FS OS projects. A more neutral reword would simply mention that this K&R-to-ANSI code replacement is a goal of the project. --Korpios 06:12, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * A decent rewrite would state why. -- Maru Dubshinki

Schism background
Can anyone provide some background on the OpenBSD/NetBSD schism? It seems to be near impossible to find actual information on it that's not presented from one particular point of view... -- Schnee (cheeks clone) 23:42, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Theo's webpage has an archive of the email conversation which caused him to leave. Text HTML      --Darrien 16:05, 2005 Jan 7 (UTC)


 * I know. I tried reading that, too, but frankly, it's not useful, for three reasons at least: a) some emails from conversations threads are left out, even though they are replied to / quoted later on. b) it's so badly formatted / presented that it makes you wonder whether there even was any intent to make it readable. c) it's just one side's presentation, namely that of Theo - what I'm looking for is something that's a neutral account of what has actually happened. Thanks, though. -- Schnee (cheeks clone) 23:40, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * I think it's all going to be fairly POV, as it seems to have been a personal rather than technical conflict. You might find this summary of coremail helpful. --Gruepig 00:54, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks. That seemed rather POV, too, but at least it was readable. ^_~ --Schnee (cheeks clone) 05:05, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * That article is extremely biased, saying things like "OpenBSD is everything NetBSD is, plus more" and trying to convince the reader that Theo was victimized by evil core. Which he probably was, but the article is still presenting only one side of the story. And the author has serious misunderstandings about the potential for code-sharing between forks and the licensing of the Linux kernel. About the only nice thing you can say is that it was readable. --Yath 01:30, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * If you spend any time reading Theo's posts to the OpenBSD mailing lists you'll realise that he pulls no punches in what he says and has no reservations about using rather "colourful" language when dealing with people. A good example of this can be seen in this mailing list post where he accuses Daniel J. Bernstein of acting like a "fucking asshole loser" for questioning why his software was removed from ports. AFAIK it's this kind of behaviour that got his commit access to NetBSD revoked. --SimonMorgan 14:40, 31 Aug 2005 (UTC)


 * That's your opinion. Theo doesn't seem to adhere to the politically correct movement. Nobody forces anyone to use OpenBSD. If you find Theo's behavior so offensive, you know what to do.  Stop whining. --24.202.172.138 20:06, 1 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Did you actually read what I said or did you just pick out random words on which to base your reactionary diatribe? I don't see anywhere where I expressed any "opinion" as opposed to simple facts. Theo swears a lot and doesn't mind insulting people in public. I didn't say they don't deserve it, I didn't say that's a bad thing and I sure as hell didn't say I find it offensive. For somebody so quick to protect Theo's right to express his opinion in any way he sees fit you seem awfully keen to lambast people you deem to be expressing opinions to the contrary. SimonMorgan 00:44, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Please, don't be a hypocrite. Saying Theo "ACCUSES Daniel J. Bernstein of acting like...", and "this is the KIND of BEHAVIOR..." are a way to hide your opinion.  Sure, subtle, but often effective. Extrapolating on the why Theo got expulsed of NetBSD from news posts is ridiculous.  Try again. --24.202.172.138 19:37, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * My opinion is that you're a fucking idiot. How's that for subtle? End of discussion. SimonMorgan 17:53, 5 September 2005 (UTC)


 * If you spend any time reading DJB's e-mails in that discussion you would realize that was a completely valid use of the term "FUCKING ASSHOLE LOSER", as he was being a complete dick to everyone at OpenBSD because they were honouring a request of his to not redistribute modified versions of his software, they removed them from ports because he did not want things being redistributed and OpenBSD did not want to request permission to distribute every one of DJB's programmes every time they did anything to them. He proceeded to raise a stink about it because his opinion is right and everyone involved with OpenBSD is wrong.  Janizary 00:15, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Jesus, what's wrong with you people? Where did I say it wasn't justified? SimonMorgan 00:44, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Nothing, I was adding that the guy was being a total ass and had earned more than a telling off, outsiders may come around some day and read this you know. Janizary 00:59, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Why don't you leave it up to the reader to decide whether he deserved it or not? SimonMorgan 10:54, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Because of the manner in which you referred to Theo's statement, saying he accused him of being an asshole makes it sound like there is some sort of interpretation required, that perhaps it was going too far to do so. Theo doesn't go out of his way to call people cockheads, they provoke it and he obliges them.  Daniel, someone that you would think would act like a professor, started making a total dick of himself telling everyone how wrong they were, because they didn't agree with his opinion, there's litle else you can call that and it's always nice to have a second opinion in these things so people can at least read both sides of the story.  In talk pages at least.  Janizary 15:35, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes. As it happens I do think there is some sort of interpretation required, like most things in life. How do you suppose you're giving a "second opinion" when, by your own admission, I'm leaving it up to the reader to formulate an interpretation? People can read both sides of the story by clicking on the link I went out of my way to provide. SimonMorgan 21:11, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh yes, we all know how many people on Slashdot read the article before making judgements and even discussing the subject. 69.197.95.218 13:48, 5 September 2005 (UTC)


 * This isn't Slashdot you fucking retard. And what's your point anyway? That people should post their opinions about things on the Internet because nobody takes the time to read things so that they can form their own opinions? Congratulations, you win the award for most idiotic paradox. End of discussion. SimonMorgan 17:53, 5 September 2005 (UTC)


 * It was pointing out that people don't always take the time to read things that they can or should, thus it is best to have as much information readily and as many opinions available as possible in a discussion, so as to give depth to the issue at hand. You seem really defensive of your opinion that Theo is a brutal uncaring dick, while I and others have been adding that he is not arbitrarily like that but is only this way when provoked.  Slow your roll some time, you cannot end a discussion by saying it's over - you're not the only one in it.  Janizary 00:26, 6 September 2005 (UTC)


 * How the fuck does having a bunch of random opinions help anybody become enlightened? Jesus, every time you open your mouth you seem like an even bigger moron than before. And now all of a sudden my opinion is that Theo is a "brutal uncaring dick"? Where the fuck did I say that? Let me make this clear for you: I don't think that. My original post was simply my contribution to a discussion on why Theo was kicked off the NetBSD project and you and 24.202.172.138 added 2 + 2 and got 5. In fact, I find his attitude refreshing. Why waste your time or mince your words when dealing with idiots, right? Congratulations, you and 24.202.172.138 have been preaching to the converted. Give yourselves an extra +20 moron points. And why are you accusing me of being defensive? Because I'm swearing and insulting you? What about when your beloved Theo does the same thing? Now go back to kissing pictures of Theo or whatever it is you zealots spend your time doing and STOP WASTING MY FUCKING TIME. I will not be replying to this thread again because the sensation bears a distinct similarity to banging my head against a brick wall. And when I said "end of discussion", I meant the one between me and you. SimonMorgan 10:18, 6 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Random opinions show that there is an issue that people have a split opinion on, like with the FSF and it's use of Free or the OSI and it's use of Open Souce - both are trying to redefine words to meet their own agendas, there are people that constantly argue about that and it helps to point out to those who are not familiar with all parties involved that there is something here which is in dispute - that not all of what you read there will be the pure truth with no bias added. The use of language is only the inferred reason Theo was removed and the one that people outside of the core who supported his removal used at the time - there was never an official word given, nothing concrete.  I am not forcing you to debate this matter, it's your choice.  I was adding a simple comment before you started acting as though a prickly didlo was going off in your backside.  I pointed out that DJB went to Theo's house and shit on his waffles, so Theo told him to take it elsewhere because he was being a complete and total fucking asshole.  Theo has said pretty much the same thing to Richard Stallman several times for going on the OpenBSD mailing lists and preaching his gospel.  Janizary 15:56, September 6, 2005 (UTC)


 * Please, let's firstly keep this civil and without personal attacks. Secondly, let's keep the conversation relevant to improvements that can be made to the article. Dysprosia 00:55, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

3.7 changes added
Hello, I have made the following changes (diff here) to the page regarding the recent changes in the 3.7 snapshots. I forgot to login and didn't notice. --Kintaro 10:05, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Presently being rewritten
If you look in the history, you'll find that I am making all sorts of random changes to this article. Please fix any mistakes on dates and data I make, I am doing parts of this from my memory and have to track down better details for some of this, especially the information on grep, diff and gzip. I will be looking in the archives of mailing lists for better details and if that fails, cvs. 65.94.52.193 21:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Ok, that's it for now. I'll try and go over that tomorrow to see if I made any gross errors, but I think it's pretty much right. 65.94.52.193 23:28, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Application development with Eclipse
I believe it would be useful to indicate that Eclipse 3.1 (the latest stable version) is in the ports tree. I know Wikipedia isn't a publicity platform, but I think it is worthwhile to inform potential users of that fact.

Currently, high-level application developers are very much interested in Eclipse and NetBeans. They get the impression (I have only anecdotal evidence) that OpenBSD has only low-level (not in the pejorative meaning) dev. tools.

Pascal D.


 * I don't think "low-level" is used as a pejorative in this context. Anyway, including that info in the article seems like a good idea. --Yath 20:33, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I would think that would be a mistake. If someone wants to know that Eclipse is in the ports tree, they can take a look for themselves -- there is a link in the article. This is an article primarily about OpenBSD and not the software that runs on it. Dysprosia 02:38, 3 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree it is an article about OpenBSD and not the software that runs on it. Though, asking for people new to OpenBSD to browse the Web CVS ports tree to figure out if Eclipse or NetBeans is available isn't a nice solution.  The goal is to inform potential users of the fact that "major" applications ARE available for this OS too.  I am not going to fight 'till death for that one though. ;-) --[Pascal D.] 24.202.172.138 16:53, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Development team
The development team for OpenBSD is "Theo de Raadt"? He is the coordinator alright, but "the" team? --[Pascal D.] 24.202.172.138 16:58, 3 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I changed it inline with various other projects listed under "Free software operating systems". SimonMorgan 21:24, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

"liberating code" is POV
The article reads:

"In their many years of "liberating" code, OpenBSD has made some significant strides - here are some highlights:"

Followed by a list that includes several replacements of GPL utilities. According to wikipedia, GPL is a free software license. Even according to the OpenBSD project, GPL is free (since they still include GPLed code in base). But the article is impliing that it had to be "liberated". I consider that to be POV.

However, just replacing the word with something else that doesn't imply GPL is not free is not enough, IMHO. This is supposed to be a list of "significant strides". And I don't think that things like re-writing grep or bc are significant strides. Specialy when there's already a free version available (which is probably more complete).

I suggest simply removing the references to "GPL to BSD" rewrites.

Robertmh 19:08, 18 September 2005 (UTC)


 * You may be right about terminology, but you are confusing the issue of "significant strides", read the sentence backwards. Dysprosia 22:07, 18 September 2005 (UTC)


 * You are completely wrong, liberating is a word which implies the removal of restrictions, that is exactly what is being done. The GPL is not something that needs to be mentioned with this part, because it is soon followed by all those GPL programmes which were replaced, listing the reason for the replacement on a programme by programme basis.  Your point of view on what a significant stride is is obviously different from that of the OpenBSD team, which are looking to make this system more liberal - thus any replacement of a restrictive item is a step forward.  If someone wanted, they could make an even more liberated operating system, it could be released under the public domain.  That would be even more liberal than OpenBSD.  Think in degrees, where the GPL is less free than the BSDL and thus being replaced with the more liberal one.  Janizary 09:13, 19 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Of course in this sense the word liberating means removal of restrictions. But this is not clear to all, and thus may not be exactly NPOV. Explaining what is going on would be best and neutral. Dysprosia 09:39, 19 September 2005 (UTC)


 * IMHO the current wording (In addition, OpenBSD has a history of fighting for more liberally licenced releases of code) is fair and NPOV. Whether or not you agree with the BSD philosphy or the GPL philsophy is irrelevant since the license of a BSD type licenses is clearly more liberal then GPL. If you really feel the need to change it, then perhaps something like "In addition, OpenBSD has a history of fighting for more liberally licensed that is fewer license restrictions on releases of code" Nil Einne 17:33, 23 October 2005 (UTC)