OpenBSD Meets The Cat License Sketch [updated]

Ash'aman writes "The OpenBSD crew have just posted lyrics and illustrations for the upcoming release of OpenBSD 3.5. Included is a hillarious parody of the Monty Python 'cat license' sketch with respect to their battle against software patents over redundancy protocols. Check it out here." The sketch is ready; the software is listed with a May 1st release date. As several Monty Python fans have pointed out, the original sketch is officially called the fish license sketch; the cat just comes earlier in the script.

Re:My OpenBSD success story

[Juntao]

Busted! OpenBSD doesn't support SMP ... yet.

Re:My OpenBSD success story

[Anonymous Coward]

just a side comment: OpenBSD doesn't support SMP yet, but, it'll still run on SMP hardware without any problems (except that it'll only use a single processor).

Re:My OpenBSD success story

[Juntao]

Yes. But then the author had no point in stating he's using OpenBSD on *quad* xeons.

Re:There was a t-shirt shop called OpenBSD...

[Dr. Smeegee]

Stop picking on your little brother.

Why do you think he is so prickly?

Re:No principles either.

[vrtsdaemon]

God forbid they try to make money so they can keep the project going. they don't "include" non-free stuff. they offer it for you to buy, if you'd like to support their efforts. everything can't be perfect, so don't be a dick about it.

The Original Python Skit is the 'Fish License'

[Anonymous Coward]

'Cat License'?

It's Not 'Cat License', you smarmy Git! Run, Don't Walk, to the video store and rent episode #23 of Monty Python's Flying Circus..

And you call yourself a Geek... For Shame.

Re:The Original Python Skit is the 'Fish License'

[Dr. Smeegee]

`Strewth. To Wit: [jumpstation.ca]

Fish Licence Customer: Hello, I would like to buy a fish license, please.
Shopkeeper: A what?
Customer: A license for my pet fish, Eric.
Shopkeeper: How did you know my name was Eric?
Customer: No no no, my fish's name is Eric, Eric the fish. He's an halibut.....

Error in transcript

[jtheory]

Odd, this was wrong in both the linked transcript in the parent, and in the CARP take-off.

The line is NOT "Why should I be tied with the epithet 'loony'...".

Tied? Who "ties" someone with an epithet?
The word is TARRED.

There are plenty of Brits out there... isn't there just one out there (who'll understand the accent) who's willing to transcribe this stuff? /grumblegrumble

Yeah, I admit I know the sketch by heart. I can even do the different accents, and the whistling bit at the end. But to the untrained eye, I seem perfectly normal....

Re:Error in transcript

[MisterFancypants]

Nitpicking the transcription of a Monty Python skit in a Slashdot post, eh? Trying to win those last few Dork Points to put you over the top in the Dork of the Year contest?

kudos to openbsd

[raffe]

Big kudos to the openbsd people for moving away from patents. It foss doesnt look carefully software patents will cruch us!

This sketch is funnier

[Anonymous Coward]

DEAD OPERATING SYSTEM SKETCH Cast:
Mr. Praline: John Cleese
Shop Owner: Michael Palin

A customer enters an operating system shop.

Mr. Praline: 'Ello, I wish to register a complaint. (The owner does not respond.)
Mr. Praline: 'Ello, Miss?
Owner: What do you mean "miss"?
Mr. Praline: I'm sorry, I have a cold. I wish to make a complaint!
Owner: We're closin' for lunch.
Mr. Praline: Never mind that, my lad. I wish to complain about this operating system what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very boutique.
Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, *BSD...What's,uh...What's wrong with it?
Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. It's dead, that's what's wrong with it!
Owner: No, no, it's uh,...it's resting.
Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead operating system when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.
Owner: No no it's not dead, it's, it's restin'! Remarkable OS, *BSD, idn'it, ay? Beautiful kernel!
Mr. Praline: The kernel don't enter into it. It's stone dead.
Owner: Nononono, no, no! It's resting!
Mr. Praline: All right then, if it's restin', I'll wake it up! (bashes at the keyboard) 'Ello, Mister *BSD! I've got a lovely fresh kernel update for you if you show...

(owner hits the keys)

Owner: There, it spewed some debug output to the command line!
Mr. Praline: No, it didn't, that was you hitting the keys!
Owner: I never!!
Mr. Praline: Yes, you did!
Owner: I never, never did anything...
Mr. Praline: (yelling and typing into the console repeatedly) 'ELLO COMMAND PROMPT!!!!! Testing! Testing! Testing! Testing! This is your nine o'clock cron job!

(Rips out hard drive from computer case and thumps it on the counter. Shoves it back inside the case and reboots the system - blank screen.)

Mr. Praline: Now that's what I call a dead operating system.
Owner: No, no.....No, it's stunned!
Mr. Praline: STUNNED?!?
Owner: Yeah! You stunned it, just as it was finishing an I/O task! *BSD stuns easily, major.
Mr. Praline: Um...now look...now look, mate, I've definitely 'ad enough of this. That operating system is definitely deceased, and when I purchased it not 'alf an hour ago, you assured me that its total lack of responsiveness was due to it bein' in the process of recompiling itself after a particularly comprehensive code update.
Owner: Well, it's...it's, ah...probably pining for some dilettante dabbling.
Mr. Praline: PININ' for some DILETTANTE DABBLING?!?!?!? What kind of talk is that? Look, why did it fall flat on its back the moment I started Emacs?
Owner: *BSD prefers swapping everything out to the hard drive! Remarkable variant, id'nit, squire? Lovely kernel!
Mr. Praline: Look, I took the liberty of examining the system when I got it home, and I discovered the only reason that it had been printing any text at all to the screen was because of all the WORRYING COMPILER WARNINGS encountered while it was being rebuilt.

(pause)

Owner: Well, o'course it was spitting out those warnings! If I hadn't updated the kernel with an unstable development build, you might have had your FTP server compromised [slashdot.org], and VOOM! Bye bye to your business.
Mr. Praline: "Server"?!? Mate, this OS wouldn't "serve" if you put four million volts through it! It's bleedin' demised!
Owner: No no! It's pining!
Mr. Praline: It's not pinin'! It's passed on! This OS is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker! It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! It's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! The numbers continue to decline for *BSD but Free

Re:This sketch is funnier

[Bob Cat - NYMPHS]

Had I points, I would mod you up, Mr AC.

Why'd ya post anon, anyway?

Re:This sketch is funnier

[CoolVibe]

I guess he posted AC because it's not original. The blimmin BSD-are-dying-trolls have been posting this for ages. Not that those fucks know what they're talking about though, but that's offtopic I guess.

At least it's remotely on-topic now. By the way, I like most of the OpenBSD songs, it's a nice touch. Maybe I have to compose a little DragonFly anthem :)

Insane

[Anonymous Coward]

This is insane!!! I find it quite ridiculous; look at the measures that the OpenBSD folks had to go through just to implement a Free protocol.

Well, I guess we should abandon all OSS/GPL software and OS'.

I am not a OpenBSD user but I do support their idea to implement a free version of a commercial product or invent their own from scratch. And I am quite disappointed about them having a hard time getting a port assignment from IANA.

Re:Insane

[Nimrangul]

CARP is truly one of the best advancements the OpenBSD team have come up with yet.

And I know it is flamebait to some, but I think the best part is that it is actually free, rather than free as defined by the Free Software Foundation.

Linux implementation?

[Anonymous Coward]

An implementation on Linux would certainly be helpful in making this implementation more widespread -- and let's face it -- there is no viable alternative for a *free* operating system. It is pretty clear the IETF have long ago been infiltrated and taken over by corporate interests and will probably never again support truely open standards. And you know what, I have a lot more faith in the ability of the OpenBSD developers chances of making a halfway decent and secure protocol than Ciscos.

(This really des

Re:Linux implementation?

[Jose]

check out UCARP [ucarp.org]. It's a userland implementation of CARP....enjoy!

Re:Linux implementation?

[JustinXB]

If you have faith in OpenBSD developers, why not use the OS instead of trying to port CARP to other OSes? It will run best on OpenBSD, plus it has the great pf packet filter.

Re:Insane

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, stop and think about it for a second. The BSD licenced software is still there, and still free. Someone else can make a product from it that isn't free, but that doesn't make the original unfree. The BSD licensed software is already perpetually free, derivitive works just don't have to be. The GPL just makes the sofware, and all derivitive works, forcibly open source perpetually. That is not free. Free is not defined by some nutcase with no grounding in reality, look it up in the dictionary.

Re:Insane

[DeltaSigma]

Call me a nutcase, but I see the sanity in it.

I could develop a GUI front end to OpenBSD's pf, pfsync, and carp, sell it binary only.

A company could buy this product, implement it, and spend many hours training users to use it (okay, a company isn't going to spend thousands of dollars teaching end-users firewall software, but this is just an example).

Now if I refused to implement updates to this software coming from the OpenBSD team, and instead relied on my own mediocre updates developed in-house and be

Re:Insane

[kjd]

You're right that we don't have to worry about Free/Net/Open/Dragonfly BSD suddenly turning evil and closing their source.

But just remember that the FSF, Richard Stallman, Gnu Developers, and Linus Torvalds don't even have the option of suddenly turning evil and closing their source.

Everyone mentioned above has the same option of closing their source. You can't take away the previously-existing software in either case. The difference is that anyone can closed-source-distribute the BSD-licensed software

Re:Insane

[Nimrangul]

No, it isn't just the original coder. All those that contributed must agree to change from the GPL. That's why it is referred to as viral.

Re:Insane

[kjd]

I said the original copyright holder. :)

In a program with multiple contributors, there are multiple copyright holders, unless they have legally signed their contributions over to another party.

Re:Insane

[DeltaSigma]

The difference is that anyone can closed-source-distribute the BSD-licensed software, while only the original copyright holder can closed-source-distribute the GPL-licensed software.

I guess that's my point. In my opinion (mine, I'm not Merriam Webster) the definition of free software is it will always be free to every licensee. Whereas the BSD license is free up to the first licensee.

BSD definately gives every licensor more options and is more free in that sense, I'm not trying to sidestep that poi

Re:Insane

[Bensmum]

No, its free to all licensees. People getting a derivitive work under a different license from a different place are not licencees, and if they want the original, they can get it under the BSD license. That is what free means. The GPL is not free, because I can't do whatever I want with it. Public domain is free, in every definition of the word. BSD is obviously closer than GPL. The GPL is only free if you redefine free to mean what a crazy whackjob wants it to mean for his propoganda.

Re:Insane

[Anonymous Coward]

You are spewing a lot of inaccurate statements. In particular, whatever you mean by "software aquired under the BSD license" being Free, the GNU folks do consider the BSD license to be a free software license.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html [gnu.org]

You describe "Free-Software" (it is not hyphenated) as that being licensed under terms that "make it perpetually free". As the original terms under which you obtain a work cannot be arbitrarily changed, if you obtain it Free of restrictions it will rema

Re:Improvements and Additions

[beerwolff]

Firstly, pf IS available on NetBSD.

PF Port for NetBSD 1.6.1 [kerneltrap.org]

Also I don't really think there's that much of a performance difference between NetBSD and OpenBSD. Although the latest release of Open I've tried is 3.3, so unless it got a lot slower...

Re:Improvements and Additions

[ArbitraryConstant]

I've never been able to tell, but there are benchmarks that seem to indicate NetBSD is the better performer in a number of key areas. I couldn't say one way or the other, and I've never run them on the same hardware. But if performance is your priority, use Linux or FreeBSD.

OpenBSD is an agressively competent firewall system, and NetBSD is very good for playing with rediculously minimal hardware. The areas where they're good overlap a bit.

Try both. They're both very easy to install on a spare box. Even if

For all the "dead OS" trolls...

[cipher chort]

Have you actually checked out what OpenBSD has been doing instead of blindly ranting about it? Go ahead and click the link http://www.openbsd.org/35.html

Notable additions (besides CARP)
BGP4 daemon, unmatched by any other free routing software
pfsync to share firewall states across multiple boxen (goes along with CARP)
amd64 support with on-chip W^X
Security improvements for malloc
Several more daemons run with privilege separation
Support for native AES instructions on some VIA C3 CPUs (accelerated crypto)

Far from being dead, several network equipment vendors are using OpenBSD as a platform for their software, such as SourceFire and nCircle.

The difference is that OpenBSD tries to be an OS for professionals and do things that replace commercial products from companies like Cisco. While the average home user doesn't give a crap (oooh, we want accelerated 3D!) many professionals do (BGP routing, HighAvailability firewalls, professional grade documentation, secure configuration by default, etc).

Oh and buy the way, SMP is actually in CVS and you can actually use it; it's just not part of the 3.5 release.

Re:For all the "dead OS" trolls...

[cipher chort]

So people who obsess about getting their new box setup w/o Microsoft, but with OOo, Samba, NDIS wrapper, KDE, VNC, IPP, etc (hint: all basically just like Microsoft, only "free") are professionals, but people who keep the Internet running are not?

Oh OK, I see your point. waaaiiit...

Most average human beings can at least put pipes together, they just don't want to get dirty. If the posts I see every day on Linux mailing lists and message boards are any indication, even running a simple LAN must be akin t

Re:All I got was a 404 error

[cipher chort]

Hint: It's only funny if it's based on truth. The link works fine, hence your joke is unfunny.

Re:For all the "dead OS" trolls...

[arivanov]

I have not used OpenBSD as I have had enough of it around 3.0 and have moved to Free for other BSD based tasks so I cannot comment on the "industrial strength" of their BGP implementation. What I would comment on is that you get what you deserve:

1. 99% of the stuff related to various seamless failover methods versus a stupid server box are patented.

2. 99% of designs I have seen based on HSRP, VRRP, phase of the moon, moode of the designer's wife, etc have multiple single points of failure.

They are the wr

test

[FunkSoulBrother]

testy times two