|
UNIX timeline...
1 Attachment(s)
|
Most unlikely. Certain packages develop in BSD of some flavor first and are ported to Linux, but generally changes needed for new hardware and environments are taking place in Linux first. As long as some development is going forward at multiple levels in each kernel environment there is unlikely to be a thinning. Each of those that now exist do so because there is something that they support better than the others.
If you looked, instead, at the Unix variants that have gone extinct you can see the pattern. Either the hardware that they ran on vanished, or they ran out of developers and support and were replaced by a more vibrant product and COMMUNITY! Understanding the PEOPLE and politics in the support communities and supporting companies is key to prediction in this space. I lack enough information to make secure predictions, but have enough for some general ones that seem obvious. While support and demand are present, the product will continue. |
I'm not sure what the point of this thread is and wpeckham, I believe you may be replying to the OP's signature?
Regardless, your assessment of hardware driver development isn't entirely correct. With the exception of Linux KMS/DRM video drivers/X.org drivers, the *BSD projects develop their own hardware drivers independently. There is porting of these between the individual projects, but in order to be used in said projects they usually have to be licence compatible. With the notable exception of DragonFly BSD, I'm not aware of any BSD derived project which permits GPL'd code in the base system - OpenBSD certainly does not. While Linux certainly supports "more hardware" and probably supports some newer hardware sooner than e.g. FreeBSD, it's not to say that support is simply "better" or more current across the board. All have different objectives and focus on different areas. I have come across devices which were "supported" in Linux, but poorly, but which work flawlessly in FreeBSD or OpenBSD and vice versa of course. But when all is said and done it's if your hardware is supported or not which matters most - and not if the kernel has a gazillion (most likely unmaintained) drivers for hardware you don't use and won't ever use. |
Quote:
--- [1] http://www.openbsd.org/goals.html [2] http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cv...ype=text/plain |
Yes, that is indeed correct and apologies for the omission/lack of clarity there, but I understand that LLVM/clang is/was UIUC licensed?
|
University of Illinois/NCSA Open Source License, per /usr/src/gnu/llvm/LICENSE.TXT
|
Which is the same as the UIUC licence? I wasn't aware that was incompatible.
https://opensource.org/licenses/NCSA |
The LICENSE.TXT file I cited contains additional clauses governing third party software, disclaimer of warranty, and a list of additional licenses.
Linky: http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cv...ype=text/plain But it isn't solely the license alone that the Project uses to determine if software should be in the src/gnu tree. It began that way, historically, but other software can be found there. See the [2] link in my first reply. |
Ok, that makes sense, thanks for the clarification.
|
I've always rather liked this chart for its overwhelming-ness.
|
|
It's good up till that time.
As Faulkner said, "The past is always with us. In fact, it's not even past." |
Quote:
This simplified one one has been around for quite a few years: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...ory-simple.svg (not sure exactly how accurate it is) |
just for info
openbsd is a fork of NETBSD :idea: |
https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~reinho.../3reasons.html
:hattip: 3 Reasons to use FreeBSD... Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:54 PM. |