Unified BSD?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
41 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Johnny Billquist
On 2012-11-13 11:45, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
>> On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin  Björklin <[hidden email]> 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.
>
> 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.

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...)

        Johnny

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Martin-371
In reply to this post by Ignatios Souvatzis-2
No offense Ignatios Souvatzis but your reference to Minix being a 7th BSD
distro is like saying FreeBSD (or any of the other major BSDs) is another
Linux because of its inter-compatibility for certain user-land components
and various shared code. Minix has a minimal amount of NetBSD code and most
of it being userland tools and package management. The actual core of Minix
is totally different to NetBSD; MINIX is a microkernel and NetBSD is a
monolithic kernel being a major difference. Mac OS X i can understand but
again the core of OSX is based of Mach 3, FreeBSD and OPENSTEP, with a lot
of modified code (more like BSD's 2nd or 3rd cousin).
Although with that i suppose it depends on how you are defining what
classifies as a BSD distribution. If your going of whether they have used
any source from BSD then your going to be hard-pressed to classify one that
isn't BSD. However, 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 management, IPC, I/O, etc...) is based of per-say
NetBSD, i only chose NetBSD because it has what i believe is cleaner code
than the others, and is structured in a way that would make it "easier" to
modify and move components.
Sure it wouldn't be true to the roots of an actual unified BSD that is
based of 4.4BSD lite and has a mesh core of OpenBSD, FreeBSD & NetBSD, but
my point isn't about 4.4BSD lite or creating a "true unified BSD" down to
the core (where all BSD developers work on one project).
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.

Your suggestion i would think is possible, but only by being realistic
about it. Using an already stable kernel and then modifying it where
necessary to make it compatible.

lol, that's just my 2-cents about it.

Hell the idea is more possible with the BSDs than it is with Linux. I
wouldn't even consider trying to create a unified Linux. Linux is such a
jumbled mess, that i wouldn't want to go anywhere near a project trying to
un-jumble it with a 10ft pole, as it would take about as long to un-jumble
it as it would to finish the same idea on BSD. I like Linux but if your
talking about a project/s being unified, BSD is leaps and bounds ahead of
Linux. So while Linux is doing better in terms of popularity, BSD has a far
greater potential for more than Linux, just because each project has made
such a strong base foundation and is so well organized. :D

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Ignatios Souvatzis <[hidden email]
> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
> > On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin  Björklin <[hidden email]>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
>         -is
>
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

illoai@gmail.com
In reply to this post by Lars Engels-2
On 13 November 2012 07:04, Lars Engels <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:45:11AM +0100, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
>> > On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin  Björklin <[hidden email]> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>
> MirBSD / MirOS is dead:
>
> http://www.freshbsd.org/search?project=mirbsd
>
> Last commit:  2011-08-29 23:00:00

Latest looks like 20120911 via http://www.mirbsd.org/MirOS/current/

Also, mksh (I use this on gentoo) & jupp (a fork of joe: I still use the ol
jstar for word processing) are both regularly worked upon.

In any case (getting back to the Original Troll), the various BSD
projects regularly borrow code from each other, so I hardly see the
point.

--
--
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Johan Beisser
In reply to this post by Ignatios Souvatzis-2
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:45 AM, Ignatios Souvatzis
<[hidden email]> 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.

OS X has benefitted greatly from FreeBSD, Apple hiring former FreeBSD
core team members. And indirectly from OpenBSD as well, with modern
versions of OS X, 10.7+, have pf.

Cross pollination is a huge benefit to the BSD community.
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Mihai Popescu-3
In reply to this post by Robin Björklin
The "Unified BSD" idea is as crazy as the decision to split this
discussion on multiple lists. I've quit reading this, but I got the
Nick's insights, nice and touching as always.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Unified BSD?

Tim Larson-3
In reply to this post by Robin Björklin
I know the basic history of all the BSDs and the reasons for divergence, but I've always tended to think of them as different focus areas of a single project. The best ideas tend to get shared around, where applicable, but each retains its unique focus and niche within the greater whole. 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: [hidden email]
p: 877-505-7770
d: 402-505-7770



This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify by return email. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Warning: Although the company has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email, no assurance or warranty is given that this email and any attachments are free of viruses.

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Julian H. Stacey-3
In reply to this post by Johnny Billquist
Hi,
Reference:
> From: Johnny Billquist <[hidden email]>
> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:34:56 +0100
> Message-id: <[hidden email]>

Johnny Billquist wrote:

> On 2012-11-13 11:45, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
> >> On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin  Björklin <[hidden email]> 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.
> >
> > 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.
>
> 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...)
>
> Johnny
No they were sequential from same team, not later parallel forks.

Cheers,
Julian
--
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com
 Reply below not above, like a play script.  Indent old text with "> ".
 Send plain text. Not: HTML, multipart/alternative, base64, quoted-printable.

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Marc Espie-2
In reply to this post by Ignatios Souvatzis-2
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:45:11AM +0100, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
> > On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin  Björklin <[hidden email]> 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.
>
> At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list.

Nice. And it's not April the first yet.
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Jeremy C. Reed
In reply to this post by Julian H. Stacey-3
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, not later parallel forks.

1BSD is not an operating system. 2BSD wasn't an operating system until
2.8BSD which was after 3BSD.  I'd suggest that 2.x and 4.x are different
forks; they had some different developers, lots of different code, but
also lots of shared code.

echo uggc://errqzrqvn.arg/obbxf/ofq-uvfgbel/ | \
 tr "noqruvxzabcefgl" "abdehikmnoprsty"

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

matthew sporleder
In reply to this post by Robin Björklin
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Robin  Björklin
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> First and foremost I'd like to present myself, I'm a young and naive junior
> sys admin that think people should be able to compromise and see the bigger
> picture and the good of the cause.
>
> Now over to the reason for my post.
>
> As all of you probably know there's a lot of buzz around Gnu/Linux these
> days and I'm pretty sure you couldn't care less. What I'm wondering is why
> the BSD community which from what I can gather isn't as big as the Linux
> community have decided to split their resources into several different
> projects/forks/distributions. To 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 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" advocate
hardware manufacturers and industry types to fund (with money)
development of drivers.

Matt
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Johnny Billquist
In reply to this post by Julian H. Stacey-3
On 2012-11-13 18:51, Julian H. Stacey wrote:

> Hi,
> Reference:
>> From: Johnny Billquist <[hidden email]>
>> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:34:56 +0100
>> Message-id: <[hidden email]>
>
> Johnny Billquist wrote:
>> On 2012-11-13 11:45, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
>>>> On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin  Björklin <[hidden email]> 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.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> 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...)
>>
>> Johnny
>
> No they were sequential from same team, not later parallel forks.

Not so fast... 2BSD and BSD 4 are definitely parallel, almost to this
day, I'd say... Well, BSD 4 has been sortof dead for a number of years
now, but 2BSD is not entirely so dead yet. And things were back- and
forwardported between the two for a while.

        Johnny

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Magnus Eriksson
In reply to this post by matthew sporleder
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:
> If you are interested in generating linux-like "buzz" advocate
> hardware manufacturers and industry types to fund (with money)
> development of drivers.

Not a developer, but here's something I've been thinking about: Are
there perhaps some *parts* of the major BSDs (kernel interfaces, file
formats) that could benefit from being unified / standardized?  Maybe at
least a subset of syscalls and libraries that could be agreed on and
declared stable forever so that simple binaries can run?  That is
something that's already being done for Linux compatibility - except for
the bit about stability.  But why should I have to keep Linux binaries
around for handling weird archive formats?

I think matthew is basically right; but if there was only one single
target to develop for, with a big fat sign on it saying simply "BSD",
I'd bet that arguing for getting things written - graphics drivers or
userland tools for managing ones RAID setup, or whatever would end up
being feasible - would be easier.

In my daydreams (slightly less unrealistic than the mail that started
the discussion) I'm sending an email to a developer that says "Hey, you
can get four done in one shot, and it's also a standard.  And did I
mention that Apple and the Minix project have been using lots of code
from the BSD projects?  Want to bet they'll adopt this too?".

Yeah, I need to get out more, but you get the point.


Magnus
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Martin-371
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 in the form of "pkgsrc", but this would
require a standardization of pkgsrc and how its implemented within each
BSD. As i know NetBSD, FreeBSD and DragonflyBSD all apply pkgsrc
differently.

The biggest fault i see with this idea is updates. Pkgsrc is generally just
one large blob of binaries or source that have been deemed stable and
compatible with that current release of whichever BSD in question
(generally archived by date). That means in its current form with each BSD
on a different release schedule there would be incompatibilities for those
BSDs that don't update as frequently (namely NetBSD, OpenBSD &
DragonflyBSD). Which means a change of how source and binaries are archived
not to mention pooled together.

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Magnus Eriksson <[hidden email]>wrote:

> 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:
> > If you are interested in generating linux-like "buzz" advocate
> > hardware manufacturers and industry types to fund (with money)
> > development of drivers.
>
> Not a developer, but here's something I've been thinking about: Are
> there perhaps some *parts* of the major BSDs (kernel interfaces, file
> formats) that could benefit from being unified / standardized?  Maybe at
> least a subset of syscalls and libraries that could be agreed on and
> declared stable forever so that simple binaries can run?  That is
> something that's already being done for Linux compatibility - except for
> the bit about stability.  But why should I have to keep Linux binaries
> around for handling weird archive formats?
>
> I think matthew is basically right; but if there was only one single
> target to develop for, with a big fat sign on it saying simply "BSD",
> I'd bet that arguing for getting things written - graphics drivers or
> userland tools for managing ones RAID setup, or whatever would end up
> being feasible - would be easier.
>
> In my daydreams (slightly less unrealistic than the mail that started
> the discussion) I'm sending an email to a developer that says "Hey, you
> can get four done in one shot, and it's also a standard.  And did I
> mention that Apple and the Minix project have been using lots of code
> from the BSD projects?  Want to bet they'll adopt this too?".
>
> Yeah, I need to get out more, but you get the point.
>
>
> Magnus
>
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia
In reply to this post by Robin Björklin
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.

To unify would cost the unique features of each BSD.  It may
gain us more bug fixes but only if the diversity costs didn't
also hurt the appeal to the contributors.
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia
In reply to this post by Ignatios Souvatzis-2
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.
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Hub- FreeBSD
In reply to this post by Ignatios Souvatzis-2
Actually, according to what we are tracking at http://bsdstats.org, there are currently *8*:

PC-BSD
FreeBSD
PYC-BSD (aka Rus-BSD)
DesktopBSD
OpenBSD
NetBSD
DragonflyBSD
MidnightBSD


On 2012-11-16, at 12:30 AM, Alfred Perlstein <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 11/13/12 2:45 AM, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
>>> On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin  Björklin <[hidden email]> 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.
>> 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.
>
> And Free/Net derived kernel.  (at least for unix services: vfs, inet, process)
>>
>> -is
>> _______________________________________________
>> [hidden email] mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
>
> _______________________________________________
> [hidden email] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Tomas Bodzar-4
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Hub- FreeBSD <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Actually, according to what we are tracking at http://bsdstats.org, there are currently *8*:
>
> PC-BSD
> FreeBSD
> PYC-BSD (aka Rus-BSD)
> DesktopBSD
> OpenBSD
> NetBSD
> DragonflyBSD
> MidnightBSD
>

Tracking something like DesktopBSD which doesn't exist for quite a
long time make statistics not much useful. MidnightBSD seems to be
same case as last activy on mailing list last year in May, forums
doesn't working at all so we are still on 4 core BSDs
(Open/Net/Free/Dfly).

>
> On 2012-11-16, at 12:30 AM, Alfred Perlstein <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 11/13/12 2:45 AM, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
>>>> On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin  Björklin <[hidden email]> 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.
>>> 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.
>>
>> And Free/Net derived kernel.  (at least for unix services: vfs, inet, process)
>>>
>>>      -is
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> [hidden email] mailing list
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> [hidden email] mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Johnny Billquist
On 2012-11-16 12:48, Tomas Bodzar wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Hub- FreeBSD <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, according to what we are tracking at http://bsdstats.org, there are currently *8*:
>>
>> PC-BSD
>> FreeBSD
>> PYC-BSD (aka Rus-BSD)
>> DesktopBSD
>> OpenBSD
>> NetBSD
>> DragonflyBSD
>> MidnightBSD
>>
>
> Tracking something like DesktopBSD which doesn't exist for quite a
> long time make statistics not much useful. MidnightBSD seems to be
> same case as last activy on mailing list last year in May, forums
> doesn't working at all so we are still on 4 core BSDs
> (Open/Net/Free/Dfly).

I find it rather meaningless as a tracking tool for BSD in general.
There is no way something like 2BSD would ever appear there, no matter
how many systems were installed.

And I also do happen to consider OS-X to be a BSD system. :-)

        Johnny

>
>>
>> On 2012-11-16, at 12:30 AM, Alfred Perlstein <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/13/12 2:45 AM, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote:
>>>>> On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin  Björklin <[hidden email]> 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.
>>>> At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Hub- FreeBSD
On 2012-11-16, at 6:42 AM, Erich Dollansky <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 14:52:48 +0100
> Johnny Billquist <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 2012-11-16 12:48, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Hub- FreeBSD <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Actually, according to what we are tracking at
>>>> http://bsdstats.org, there are currently *8*:
>>>>
>>>> PC-BSD
>>>> FreeBSD
>>>> PYC-BSD (aka Rus-BSD)
>>>> DesktopBSD
>>>> OpenBSD
>>>> NetBSD
>>>> DragonflyBSD
>>>> MidnightBSD
>>>>
>>>
>>> Tracking something like DesktopBSD which doesn't exist for quite a
>>> long time make statistics not much useful. MidnightBSD seems to be
>>> same case as last activy on mailing list last year in May, forums
>>> doesn't working at all so we are still on 4 core BSDs
>>> (Open/Net/Free/Dfly).
>>
>> I find it rather meaningless as a tracking tool for BSD in general.
>> There is no way something like 2BSD would ever appear there, no
>> matter how many systems were installed.
>
> the number of FreeBSD installations for Indonesia seem also very, very
> low. We would have 20% of the installation base then.

Its a purely opt-in system, excepf for PC-BSD, which has theirs as an opt-out when you install the OS … that is why its numbers are so much higher then everyone else …

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unified BSD?

Hub- FreeBSD
In reply to this post by Johnny Billquist
On 2012-11-16, at 5:52 AM, Johnny Billquist <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 2012-11-16 12:48, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Hub- FreeBSD <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, according to what we are tracking at http://bsdstats.org, there are currently *8*:
>>>
>>> PC-BSD
>>> FreeBSD
>>> PYC-BSD (aka Rus-BSD)
>>> DesktopBSD
>>> OpenBSD
>>> NetBSD
>>> DragonflyBSD
>>> MidnightBSD
>>>
>>
>> Tracking something like DesktopBSD which doesn't exist for quite a
>> long time make statistics not much useful. MidnightBSD seems to be
>> same case as last activy on mailing list last year in May, forums
>> doesn't working at all so we are still on 4 core BSDs
>> (Open/Net/Free/Dfly).
>
> I find it rather meaningless as a tracking tool for BSD in general. There is no way something like 2BSD would ever appear there, no matter how many systems were installed.
>
> And I also do happen to consider OS-X to be a BSD system. :-)

I agree on that point, which is why I run it for my desktops … but until you mention it, I'd never thought of even trying to get the script to run … have to play with that this weekend and see how "out of the box" it works, if it does …

123