Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uunet!virtech!dwex From: dwex@aib.com (David E. Wexelblat) Subject: Re: Status on discussed merge between NetBSD and FreeBSD Message-ID: <CGInJG.8qC@aib.com> Organization: AIB Software, Inc. References: <DERAADT.93Nov14110240@pain.agate> <CGIB9E.7z9@aib.com> <MYCROFT.93Nov14202336@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1993 04:38:04 GMT Lines: 92 In article <MYCROFT.93Nov14202336@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> mycroft@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) writes: > >In article <CGIB9E.7z9@aib.com> dwex@aib.com (David E. Wexelblat) >writes: > > Because all the discussion on the XFree86 development list makes it > pretty clear that libXt-based programs DON'T WORK. > >Dave, PLEASE STOP STATING THAT. IT IS WRONG. I have personally run X >applications using a shared Xt, and they work just fine. Admittedly, >the current linker is slightly hacked to make this work, but it does >in fact work. When the hell did we get on a first-name basis? You have it working now? Fine. I don't see you contributing anything to XFree86. The FreeBSD folks have spent a good deal of their time and effort on XFree86. From which YOU benefit. I don't recall ANY core NetBSD folks contributing to XFree86. Yet you use our work, and drag our name into your ego battle. Those who live in glass houses... > > First compile with PIC, next link with '-G'. That's it. There are > no .sa files with SVR4 shared libraries. > >And if you had bothered to check your facts, you'd find that is >exactly what is being worked on. > Bully for you. I have it now. Hence, by your analogy with FreeBSD, since I have it now, and you are still hacking on it, I'm better than you, right? > >This entire subthread is ridiculous. The point of the original >statement regarding shared libraries was that the FreeBSD people tried >to pick them up without any real understanding of what was going on, >and had enormous troubles. The hack they've done to ld.so to make it >work at all without random segmentation faults on startup (namely, the >stack pointer comparison) will very likely cause a binary >incompatibility if they ever want to enlarge the kernel's virtual >address space, unless they do further kluging in the kernel. It's not ridiculous. You're trying to state that some people can do certain things with your repudedly-free code, and other can't. That's silly. There are commercial Unix vendors that ship XFree86 with their Unix, with no acknowlegement to us. There are others who ship it with acknowledgement. There are some who use our code in their products, who don't acknowledge us. Still others who use our code and do acknowledge us. Do you see us getting all hot and bothered about this? No. Because when we say our released code is free, we mean that. Anyone can do anything they like with it. > >The fact that they do not think about such issues until it bites them >in the ass is one of the reasons I don't want them having unlimited >write access to the source I use. > That's not the issue. What you've been bitching about is the fact that they pick up NetBSD-current and use it. You can't have it both ways. >Of course, there is always the chance they will read this and go fix >it now. > For which you get a gold star. I would think that the NetBSD community, what with trying to support a huge number of architectures, would have learned some of the lessons that we've learned, trying to support XFree86 on a dozen or so different OSs. Do you think we would have gotten where we are today if we had been as petty and shallow as you all appear to be? We've been involved in commercial-OS ABI specification; have our code in commercial products, have our product shipped with commercial OSs, etc, etc. We have obtained a high degree of real-world acceptance. And you're down here in your tiny little world while Linux anarchy winds up with 20-50x more users than all the BSD-du-jour put together. It doesn't matter if you've got the best product around. The best doesn't always win. There's a lot more to it than technical excellence. It's mass acceptance that wins the wars. Look at MS-DOS, NFS, even X, for that matter. There have been a million things technically better. These products rule due to concensus, not brilliance. -- David Wexelblat <dwex@aib.com> (703) 430-9247 Fax: (703) 450-4560 AIB Software, Inc., 46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160, Dulles, VA 20166 Formerly Virtual Technologies, Inc. Mail regarding XFree86 should be sent to <xfree86@physics.su.oz.au> "Ooh, are you feelin' satisfied? Come on, let us give your mind a ride." -- Boston, "Feelin' Satisfied"