3 Jun
2013
3 Jun
'13
1:04 p.m.
On Mon, 3 Jun 2013 14:42:27 -0400 (EDT)
Mouse <mouse at Rodents-Montreal.ORG> wrote:
I know that you know that the GPL v3 is _very_ much
disliked by the
NetBSD developers. The problem is that there are some components of
NetBSD like GCC are taken from external sources. These sources decided
to go GPL v3. So NetBSD has no real choice. In case of GCC: Stay at the
last GPL v2 version is no solution and clang / llvm does not support
all the CPU architectures that GCC and NetBSD support... So we have to
swallow the bitter pill and accept third party components to be GPL v3
infected.
--
\end{Jochen}
\ref{http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/}
See, that's one of the things I find broken about
NetBSD: this wasn't
true of NetBSD ten years ago. It mostly wasn't true of NetBSD five
years ago. But, in recent years, NetBSD has gotten sloppy, no longer
letting their old-hardware ports keep them honest with respect to doing
things right instead of just hitting them with Moore's Law.
I call this
pragmatic. You can spend endless brain cycles in
microoptimizations or just give it the CPU cycles. Yes, it is a bit sad
that this happens. But beeing a volunteer project, the amount of brain
cycles that the NetBSD project can spend on platforms like VAX or HP300
is quite limited.
It is also not
tainted with some Linuxisms like systemd...
...instead, it's tainted with other
Linuxisms like v3 of the GPL.