Theo de Raadt gets 2004 FSF Award 233
Caligari writes "Richard Stallman, presents this year's award to Theo de Raadt.
"For recognition as founder and project leader of the OpenBSD and OpenSSH projects. Theo de Raadt's work has also led to significant contributions to GNU/Linux and other BSD distributions. Of particular note is Theo's work on OpenSSH. Theo's leadership of OpenBSD, his selfless commitment to Free Software and his advancement of network security, were cited by this year's award committee.""
Linus Torvalds? (Score:3, Interesting)
Is there a reason he didnt get this award?
That said
Re:Linus Torvalds? (Score:5, Informative)
Is there a reason he didnt get this award?
I don't know whether this is still the policy, but from memory they originally aimed for this award to go to people who hadn't already received other awards for their work on free software. Linus has so wouldn't be eligible.
Re:Linus Torvalds? (Score:3, Insightful)
Nevertheless, there's no such thing as a perfect match for an award winner (prove the Nobel Prices for Peace
Re:Linus Torvalds? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'd say that Theo is much further from the FSF's ideology than Linus is. Linus at least likes the GPL.
Re:Linus Torvalds? (Score:5, Informative)
Despite their differing views on what constitutes Free Software, though, both men are largely motivated by ideology. Consider Theo's reaction to the ipf debacle, his response to the XFree86 license change, and his appeal to the community to help fight the good fight against wlan cards that require non-freely redistributable binary firmware to function. This man is every bit as committed to software freedom as RMS is.
Linus, on the other hand, has stated publically on many occasions that he sees nothing wrong with proprietary software, and uses BitKeeper (a proprietary version control solution) to manage the Linux kernel tree (rather than say, CVS or Subversion) because, in his words, "it's better".
Without passing judgement, it is very clear that Linus values convenience above principle. This is part of the reason so many Slashbots like him: he is, in their minds, "refreshingly" a-political.
Whatever their differences, RMS and Theo are both idealistic. They are primarily motivated by their desire for Freedom, not because they want to produce the best system ever (although that may be true as well).
To me, RMS giving TdR this award is absolutely appropriate, and while I didn't expect it, I'm very pleased. I would be very surprised if Linus were named, and to be honest, I would be a little disappointed.
Not that I have anything against Linus, mind you -- he's a brilliant guy -- but at the core, he's an engineer, and so awarding him for his commitment to the ideology of Free Software would go rather against the grain, imho.
Re:Linus Torvalds? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been personally involved with all these technologies. In my shop, we run two OpenBSD firewalls, one on each available broadband service. Our automated build system is based on SCons, and our scripts make heavy use of rsync internally. Our embedded surveillance project runs Linux which we compile in a chroot build environment along the lines of scratchbox (but scratchbox didn't exist when we started). We also have an ARM7 microcontroller in our product running on top of the GNU tools compilation environment, with some structural similarities to eCos/Redboot. Have I missed anyone?
I have a coworker here educated at the U. of Calgary (where I grew up myself) who knows (but does not enjoy) Theo through overlapping social circles. We had a short debate just a few weeks ago over a spicy Sichuan lunch special about where the boundaries between competence and personality belong. My coworker suggested "couldn't he accomplish as much without pissing people off?" I countered, "for someone with a knack for pissing people off, he retains some of the smartest out there within his circle. How does he do that?" There's a line I once read in Drucker that I've taken to heart "you're not in business to win friends". For me, the bottom line is that Theo delivers, and I admire the end results of his zealous rigour (regardless of where one might choose to draw the line between those qualities).
Before I became involved in this shop, I studied computational linguistics, which brought me into contact with just about everything in the area from which rsync originated. I was depressed that Tridge had to lose the award he deserves as much (well, almost as much, although it pains me to say it).
I've read all the benchmarks over the past year that show how OpenBSD is as slow as a senile dog. Whatever. For the purpose we employ those boxes, we've never had an iota of concern over performance level except for the negotiation phase on https. Guess what? Once Via/IBM finally coughs up the C7 Esther, OpenBSD running on a steroid enhanced 486 will crush the most expensive present day Pentium IV on our most essential performance metric.
The odd thing about OpenBSD, which many people never manage to assimilate, is that you have to look at that project through a very narrow gun turret to realize just how much they accomplish by entirely ignoring the whingings from everyone else.
It's an odd day in my personal universe to see RMS pat Theo on the back. I guess it takes one to know one after all.
Re:Linus Torvalds? (Score:3, Insightful)
Whatever their differences, RMS and Theo are both idealistic. They are primarily motivated by their desire for Freedom, not because they want to produce the best system ever (although that may be true as well).
I agree on everything else but that paragraph. BSD (and so TdR) is all about making ALL software BETTER. That is the importance of free sofware in the BSD cosmovision.
Valuing convenience is a political statement. (Score:3, Insightful)
I forgot to include this in my previous follow-up: it seems quite a political statement to me to favor convenience above software freedom. I'd hardly call Torvalds apolitical, I'd say that his views are the views people have been taught to value--use what helps you get jobs done, push aside any other concern
Re:Linus Torvalds? (Score:2, Insightful)
You get a reward to be put in the spotlight. To introduce someone you didn't really know or did not yet see the full quality of his work.
Linus is already fully in the spotlight.
Re:Linus Torvalds? (Score:5, Funny)
JUST KIDDING!
He deserves it ! (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only from a pure lines-of-code point-of-view, but also by the way the OpenBSD-project scrutinizes licenses and pushes security and cryptography forward every day.
Congratulations, Theo - keep on fighting !
Agreed. (Score:2)
Re:He deserves it ! (Score:2)
Re:He deserves it ! (Score:2)
pf is now available for FreeBSD and NetBSD, so some of this work benefits other people.
Re:He deserves it ! (Score:3, Insightful)
Theo responds in typical BSD fashion... (Score:5, Funny)
He killed telnet! (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine a world without the networking Swiss Army knife that is ssh.
OpenBSD is a totally underrated OS too. Even if it is a bit slow, its packet filter actually works.
Re:He killed telnet! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:He killed telnet! (Score:2, Insightful)
I didn't say he did invent ssh, but I believe he has been the main popularizer of it by giving all and sundry a free version of it.
Re:He killed telnet! (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, the same thing as rsh, except it's encrypted which means you can safely use it over the internet. rsh brought computers on a given network together, and ssh brings computers cross WANs together. Sure you can do the same stuff with rsh, and then get rooted.
Re:He killed telnet! (Score:2)
Re:He killed telnet! (Score:2)
rsync (Score:3, Interesting)
Or you could just use rsync over ssh instead:
And if the rsync dies, you just run the same command again.
Much less typing. :-)
Re:rsync (Score:2)
Re:He killed telnet! (Score:2)
Yes, netcat does UDP too. It's funny that you are promoting it here, having never used it... Says a lot about /. doesn't it?
Netcat is a great tool, and has many uses. However, SSH is every bit as useful, if not moreso. SSH can forward every network protocol around, and it's uses are just as many as netcat. Infact, I know of numerous circumstances where you might use n
Re:He killed telnet! (Score:2)
While netcat describes itself as a swiss-army knife, ssh has a nice set of tools.
Lets say I bring my laptop to a cybercafe, and I realize I want to check my email at home. I can ssh to my server (all ports blocked except 22), and forward ports 25 and 143 to my laptop.
After I'm done reading my email, I may want to launch an X client from my desktop. 'ssh -X -C server', then on the server, 'ssh -X desktop' and launch my client.
What about doing
Re:He killed telnet! (Score:2)
It's not even his implementation originally. OpenSSH is a fork of the original ssh.com code before it went closed source. I do imagine many parts of it have been rewritten though.
Re:He killed telnet! (Score:3, Insightful)
They (Theo isn't the only one developing it) based OpenSSH on the free original, which implimented only SSH-1. They've implimented SSH2 functionality on their own, and in many cases added functionality not found in the SSH.com version.
Now, I think the OpenSSH team has earned the title of killers of telnet, because few people were adopting
Watch out! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Watch out! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Watch out! (Score:2)
Good luck with that BSD-licensed C compiler. GCC's had/has issues, but that's a big lump of code to replace.
Re:Watch out! (Score:2)
I'm not quite sure how you meant that to sound, but it does seem like you don't realize a BSD C compiler has been in the works for quite some time, and has been recieving more and more attention/support lately...
Specifically http://www.tendra.org/
Re:Watch out! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Watch out! (Score:2)
Have some fucking gratitude.
Re:Watch out! (Score:2)
If I say OpenBSD or the OpenBSD Kernel, I mean something similar.
As muc
There is somebody missing here: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:There is somebody missing here: (Score:5, Interesting)
From the beginning, Linus has held the posistion of "eh, whatever" with regards to software freedom. He'll take advantage of it, but he's been very clear on where exactly software freedom is in his list of priorties (which is: below convience).
In contrast Theo has re-written whole parts of his operating system (pf and OpenSSH) for the sake of being able to give away an entirely free-for-any-use operating system.
While Linus has made an invaluble contribution to Open Source, Theo has proven time and time again to be a strong and active advocate for Free Software (with a capital 'F').
Re:There is somebody missing here: (Score:2, Informative)
OpenSSH, hardly. In README in OpenSSH 3.9 source code:
OpenSSH is a derivative of the original and free ssh 1.2.12 release
by Tatu Ylonen. Aaron Campbell, Bob Beck, Markus Friedl, Niels
Provos, Theo de Raadt and Dug Song removed many bugs, re-added newer
features and created OpenSSH. Markus Friedl contributed the support
for SSH protocol versions 1.5 and 2.0.
Re:There is somebody missing here: (Score:2)
Good Candidate (Score:2)
Of course, Theo can be acrimonious, but that doesn't change if contribution to Free software.
Congrads Theo! (Score:5, Insightful)
And I want to thank him for his other contributions, as it has made me some good cash, installing BSD boxes in front of Windows email servers with packet filtering!
Again Thanks Theo. I wish this type of stuff could reach more mainstream news, but we can all know just like other major happenings in the world, there is a army of unsung heros who make things happen.
For those wondering "why not linus" (Score:5, Informative)
Re:For those wondering "why not linus" (Score:3, Informative)
I don't know how they decide that Theo or Guido or whoever is eligible (I'm sure they've received awards, though possibly of much less significance).
Positively surprised... (Score:2)
Re:Positively surprised... (Score:2)
The split between GNU and BSD is largely historical; BSD wasn't a full OS, rather just enhancements atop Unix (which you needed an AT&T license to run, and couldn't modify). By the time the BSD lawsuit was fleshed out and the BSD license made free, the GNU project was already well underway.
Learn more about OpenBSD technology (Score:5, Informative)
There will be a number of talks this week in Dublin, Ireland from Theo de Raadt, Henning Brauer and Ryan McBride which are open to the public and completely free of charge!
Re:Learn more about OpenBSD technology (Score:2)
Re:Learn more about OpenBSD technology (Score:2)
Oh, irony (Score:2)
That said, this is awesome. de Raadt definitely deserves the award for all the hard work he's given to the community.
Award ceremony transcript (Score:3, Funny)
Richard: "We have gathered here to honor another Free Software giant. Ladies (hello you two geeky, but quite cute girls in the back) and gentlemen, I hereby present this award to Theo de -"
Theo: "What?! An award??? I thought we were going to discuss you ditching GNU/Hurd and adopting OpenBSD as its replacement?! You got me here under false pretense, I can't fucking believe this!!!"
Richard: "Well, we knew you wouldn't have come otherwise, so I -"
Theo: "Do you realize you robbed me out of a whole day of code auditing?! Do you?! That's it, I'm suing!"
Richard: "What do you mean, you don't even have an account and I don't give out root - "
Theo: "Ohhh, veeery funny! I'm taking you to the bank for everything you've got, buddy!"
Richard: "Well, then I should just give you the $2.49 because that's all I got."
Theo: "No, here's $10, now go and have that beard trimmed for the love of everything you GNU! You look like a damned hobo!"
Richard: "Well, actually, purely technically speaking, I am as free as a hobo, except that I smell nice."
RMS smelling nice (Score:2)
From every person that I know that got the "privilege" to meet RMS in person the expression "smelling nice" usually is not in their description...
Neither is "smelling like the wino down the street" but still...
Re:RMS smelling nice (Score:2)
From every person that I know that got the "privilege" to meet RMS in person the expression "smelling nice" usually is not in their description...
A few years ago, RMS was in Oxford, UK for some talks he was doing. His accomodation fell through, so I offered to put him up in my flat for a few days. My abiding memories of his stay are that he drank gallons of herbal tea and took really long showers. In fact he was quite bemused by how small the typical British hot water tank is, as it meant he couldn't sh
This proves one thing about assholes (Score:2, Insightful)
My company based a commercial product on O-BSD, then converted to Linux when it became clear that Theo doesn't know how to anchor a diverse community. We even tried to fund his project but never got past being personally abused.
Re:This proves one thing about assholes (Score:2)
I have watched misc at openbsd.org for several years and I have never seen Theo personally abuse someone unless it is deserved. Obviously you are only telling YOUR side of the story.
to help celebrate (Score:3, Funny)
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's IMHO rather silly to watch the flame wars between the GNU/Linux and *BSD sides when there is so much more that unites us than what divides us. This award make perfect sense. In the end a gnu, a penguin and a daemon can sometimes be noisy neighbourghs, but in the end they stick together to defend their building. Shitty alegory, I know, eh.
cheers,
fsmunoz
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
They may be friends, but that doesn't change the fact that nobody has a &@$% clue how to pronounce 'gnu'.
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
(GNU is a recursive acronym for "GNU's Not UNIX"; it is pronounced "guh-noo." [gnu.org])
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
Ñu (Score:3, Funny)
Its logo says it all, it's a ñu [fotonostra.com].
For those that doesn't know how to pronounce 'ñ', it's like 'gn' in cognac or Avignon.
What? (Score:3, Insightful)
How? If you don't like the version the company you're dealing with (Sun, Apple) is shipping, you can always get the official software from openssh.org.
"GPL code belongs to you for the asking. That is also why GPL will eventually out-evolve all other software."
No. What has become obvious is that the community of developers is what drives the evolution of a system. Either can stagnate, either can advance quickly.
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:5, Insightful)
BTW, care to explain how MS locks me in by using BSD code that I can go and pick up just about anywhere else.
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:4, Informative)
BTW, care to explain how MS locks me in by using BSD code that I can go and pick up just about anywhere else.
That's more or less illustrating the point that you and most sane people don't really understand the difference between the freedoms of BSD and GPL
To answer your question though, here is an example:
In the mid 90s When it was time to put in a network layer into MS windows, MS decided to take some BSD code. They then took standard protocols like Kerberos, DNS, DHCP etc and tweaked them to work MS style so that people would be locked in to using the MS versions only. It was an intentional interoperability problem to make things work MS-to-MS but not MS-to-nonMS. It was part of the MS policy of embrace extend and extinguish, a policy that is elaborated in their leaked "halloween" document.
You can't get hold of the propietary, extended code for windows networking to fix the operatability problem without NDA etc. You can only guess the BSD code up to the moment of forking. After the fork point, the code has been tweaked and closed and used to build a system that tries to lock you in forever after. That's the kind of danger the GPL protects you against.
The restriction of GPL protects the coders in the long run.
The freedom of BSD can restrict the coders in the long run.
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
Not really. The existence of a BSD reference standard for Kerberos may have made such a fork easier to produce, but the GPL does not prevent a
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:5, Insightful)
If Microsoft does not use the code, they invent their own protocol. When Microsoft uses BSD code as a basis, they are at least easier to guess or work around. How long has it taken the people working on Samba to under all of the SMB protocol? Many years at least. Even Stallman has said the BSD license is good for standards.
BTW, the network stack in Windows has not been based on the BSD code for years.
The restriction of GPL protects the coders in the long run.
Protects coders from what? For example, when Microsoft embraces and extends a protocol (i.e., Kerberos, DNS, DHCP), they have no need for the source. They break the protocol. The GPL nor any other open source license would have power against that. You would need a patent (yuck).
The freedom of BSD can restrict the coders in the long run.
This is never true. I never need to use a proprietary vesion of open source. Which version of Kerberos do you use? With BSD-licensed code, I have very few restrictions placed upon me as a coder. Fewer than using GPL-licensed code.
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:3, Insightful)
The BSD license intends to protect the freedom of the programmer, whereas the GPL intends to protect the freedom of the program.
The GPL is not concerned about developer's rights, unless the developer's core values vis-a-vis the freedom of the program closely follow the ideology of the GPL. For example, I (as a Free Software advocate) fee
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
Yes, actually you can [fernuni-hagen.de], and Microsoft supplies the tools on the Windows 2000 CD's to do it.
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
1) All the major GPLed projects from 15 years ago are more succesful today than they were then (with the exception of EMACS)I I can't think of any major GPL projects which have then languish when contrasted with similar BSD projects.
2) X11 is the classic counter example to corporate contributions. The entire reason the XFree86 project started was that the open source version of X11 was
a) unworkable on any platform
b) Didn't meet t
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
2) XFree came from the MIT code which wasn't corporate. Where is this corporate code?
3) othing would have stopped SGI, for example, contributing XFS to Fr
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
gcc is a fork of ...
emacs is fork of ....
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:5, Informative)
(The following uses GPL for LGPL... and BSD for BSD, X...)
2004 Theo de Raadt (BSD)
2003 Alan Cox (GPL license)
2002 Lawrence Lessig (ALL)
2001 Guido van Rossum (Python license / BSDish license)
2000 Brian Paul (X license/BSDish )
1999 Miguel de Icaza (LGPL/GPLish)
1998 Larry Wall (Artistic/ closer to BSD than GPL but...)
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
Re:BSD and FSF? (Score:2)
Q - What about the new Qt license?
A - "I'm very happy that they decided to GPL it," said Miguel, who is also on the board of the FSF. "It can only be considered a win for free software. So all in all, it's a big thing.
Re:GNU/Linux and other BSD distributions? (Score:2)
It would probably have been better as 'other BSD distributions and GNU/Linux' as that's harder to misread. Can't think of anything clearer without bringing the grammar nazis out.
Lighen up... RMS describing Linux as a BSD distribution would be quite funny actually.
Re:GNU/Linux and other BSD distributions? (Score:2)
Some grammar nazis might complain about the tautology `Berkley Software Distribution Distributions'.
Re:GNU/Linux and other BSD distributions? (Score:2, Insightful)
Now mod this insightful!!!
Re:Where's Linus? (Score:3, Informative)
Basically, it is the past year winners + Linus + RMS + Knuth + Larry Lessig. Looks like an august company and no sli
Re:hard to believe (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is OpenBSD called OpenBSD ? because it was the first BSD to make its CVS tree accessible for everyone. That's right, anyone can subscribe to source-changes and see the commit messages. And anyone can get the sources.
Now, most security fixes are NOT tagged as security fixes. They're tagged as clean-up, or reliability issues, or normal bug-fixes.
Why is this so ?
Quite simply, because those fixes are done while reading the code, NOT in reaction to a security hole.
That's what `proactive security' means. When you find something fishy, you just go and fix it, you don't sit on your fat ass and wait for months until someone finds a way to exploit it.
As a result, OpenBSD is more secure than most other OSes out there. Not because of cool technology like ProPolice or W^X, but simply because of good engineering practices.
OpenBSD doesn't have the latest cool feature. It's never been about that. But it has obsessive-compulsive developers who care about security.
Security is not a plug-in. It's not something you add to a distribution after you've put in all the carelessly designed and dangerous features.
Security is a process.
Security is a state of mind.
Security is a priority: either you put it right there, in front of you, and FIX THINGS when you think they might get broken, or... you will run into actual nasty holes, and make the front page of bugtraq.
Re:hard to believe (Score:2)
You seem to be stating that the other BSD's didn't do this or at least not until OpenBSD did it first. Granted, I wasn't around at the time OpenBSD forked off of NetBSD, but looking at this message [netbsd.org] it would seem that NetBSD's commit messages were public quite a while before OpenBSD exi
Re:hard to believe (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, most bugs we fix have some kind of security relevance. This is obvious. Now, are we going to tag each single entry we commit with `possible security fix' ? Are we going to spend a lot of time convincing other people this might be relevant ?
Nope, we are not.
We tried. This is simply a waste of time. It doesn't work. A lot of other projects don't have a clue. You tell them that what you're doing might be security-related, and you waste hours explaining the issue to them.
Think about it. Every time you simplify a piece of code, or replace an obfuscated algorithm with something simpler, you ARE handling security issues... or you might be. That's not important.
You are not going to waste time figuring out whether that fix is an actual security fix, or just some clean-up.
Because you can use the same amount of time fixing other issues, and that's more useful.
Want actual proof ? Look at all the changes in OpenBSD that replaced strcpy/strcat with strlcpy/strlcat. Now, go out on the linux lists, and ask why strlcpy still isn't a part of the glibc, but strfry is. Or look for comments on the above subject from Ulrich Drepper.
Make up your own mind.
Who do you think has a clue ?
The people who found out countless potential buffer overflows all over the place, fixed these, and still find that new code has the same mistakes and buffer overflows ?
Or the people who think that strlcpy is irrelevant because good programmers don't write buffer overflows ?
You could also look at tmpnam and mkstemp, and countless other examples.
As another instance, look at chroot and privilege separation. In many cases, the added safety translates to less features (like, a chroot'ed daemon that can no longer read its configuration file on a kill -HUP, or an http server that needs a whole set of libraries to run cgi). Bottomline, do you want the extra features, or the added security.
Most time, there is a trade. Those security fixes rely on non-portable parts of the libc. In many cases, third party software will buy back the extra stuff (look at rsync, kde and strlcpy), but this takes time...
try to do some development work, instead of posting opiniated, clueless comments on slashdot. Spend some time fixing security issues. See your patches take months to get accepted upstream. See the next release still have the bug, because some clueless, feature-conscious developer added some code with the exact same wrong pattern in another area than the one you've been fixing...
Re:hard to believe (Score:2)
Re:Open* spinoffs & the Open Source idea? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Open* spinoffs & the Open Source idea? (Score:5, Interesting)
All that was free was the released version. There was some amount of political control of information.
Reread the exchange between Theo and the other members of NetBSD-core. One persistent complaint from Theo is that he could no longer easily work on the sparc port, because he did not have access to not yet released code.
Let's put aside any re-definition of freedom by the FSF, OSI and whatever group of the month is running this show.
No, this is not free development. Theo was not free to see what was going on in NetBSD in a technical sense. He had lost control. And the people in netbsd-core used that power to try and get Theo to promise he would change his behavior.
Whatever you might think of Theo's attitude (yes, he can be a complete fucker sometimes), that's not freedom, by any sense of the world.
Now, look at the world today. All BSDs have open cvs trees. I think that would have happened, eventually, but I'm 100% certain Theo's decision to make sure OpenBSD CVS tree would be totally open to public scrutiny at all times has a HUGE role to play in that change.
Re:Open* spinoffs & the Open Source idea? (Score:2)
All BSDs have open cvs trees.
Technically, that's true. But consider FreeBSD, which uses Perforce internally, before the changes hit the CURRENT CVS branch!
Re:Open* spinoffs & the Open Source idea? (Score:4, Insightful)
Or you could phrase this as
At the end of the day, OpenBSD was created because the 'first-tier' NetBSD developers used access controls to try and enforce social policy and Theo refused to be extorted.
This whole thing cuts both ways.
Open Source Forking isn't bad (Score:2)
The ultimate threat (Score:2)
----------
> To accuse a person of sabotage, a crime, is a serious matter. If the
> accusation comes from Brett Glass, it can be ignored, but when other
> people do say it I'm entitled to refute it. I am sorry that the
> accusation was made on your mailing list.
>
> Yesterday you said you would, so
> keep your word for once.
>
> I did not make any promises to you yesterday; I stated a decision that
> I had made for my own reasons.
Bugger off, Richard.
Get o
Re:My eyes! (Score:2)
Correspondigly, the full stop after "Theo de Raadt" would indicate a longer pause, not because the latter name is necessarily greater, but because of the staggering import of the whole sentence and the necessity of picking oneself up off the floor (at least for those knowing some GNU and BSD history and the beliefs/writings of the two persons named)
Re:My eyes! (Score:2, Informative)
FTFA:
"FSF President and founder, Richard Stallman, presents this year's award to Theo de Raadt."
Does this make it any worse?
Re:Away satan! (Score:2)
Re:Away satan! (Score:2)
Re:Prime-time recognition for outstanding develope (Score:5, Interesting)
At one point I looked at the data and concluded that BSD was dying. I think that some people really think this and are not really trolling. The confusion comes in part due to a couple simple mistakes.
It is true that Netcraft has in the past indicated that *BSD is losing market share to Linux in at least the web server markets. However, these numbers are percentage based (regarding domains hosted) and probably don't represent an absolute decline. In fact, I suspect that the absolute number domain running on web servers running *BSD is probably currently growing but doing so slower than the market. This would fit with the observation that proprietary UNIX doesn;t seem to be in much of an absolute decline (with a few punctuations in the equalibrium) and that all such flavors are losing marketshare (percentage-wise) much faster than *BSD.
Secondly, because we are not seeing a mass exodus of the core developers from *BSD to Linux, I don't think one can ever say these are dying. Just as Microsoft can't kill Linux, Linux can't really kill *BSD. The only thing that can kill *BSD is, well, *BSD. More likely, we will see the licensing advantages that Linux offers disappear as proprietary UNIX and later Windows falls. At this point, Linux will still have some competative advantages, but we may see *BSD grow more rapidly once proprietary competition is eliminated.
Re:Prime-time recognition for outstanding develope (Score:3, Informative)
These are the latest data I could find about BSD market share - and they say it's gaining it.
Nearly 2 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD [netcraft.com]
"FreeBSD secured a strong foothold with the hosting and internet services communities at the genesis of the web and has anything but gone away. Indeed it is the only other operating system [besides Windows and Linux] that is gaining, rather than losing share of the active sites found by the Web Server Survey."
A more rec
Re:Prime-time recognition for outstanding develope (Score:2)
Re:Oh my god... (Score:2)