An OpenSolaris/Linux Mashup
To non-technical readers of this blog, or those uninterested in the ebbs and tides of the free software world... this might be a good entry to skip.
I was just forwarded a pointer to this note regarding Sun and OpenSolaris, written by the eponymous Linus Torvalds. And I wanted to respond directly.
__________________________
Linus,
First, I'm glad you give credit to Sun for the contributions we've made to the open source world, and Linux specifically - we take the commitment seriously. It's why we freed OpenOffice, elements of Gnome, Mozilla, delivered Java, and a long list of other contributions that show up in almost every distro. Individuals will always define communities, but Sun as a company has done its part to grow the market - for others as much as ourselves.
But I disagree with a few of your points. Did the Linux community hurt Sun? No, not a bit. It was the companies that leveraged their work. I draw a very sharp distinction - even if our competition is conveniently reckless. They like to paint the battle as Sun vs. the community, and it's not. Companies compete, communities simply fracture.
And OpenSolaris has come a very long way since you last looked. It and its community are growing, as a result of more than ZFS (although we seem to be generating a lot of interest there, not all intentional) - OpenSolaris scales on any hardware, has built in virtualization,
great web service infrastucture, fault management, diagnosability, and tons more. Feel free to try for yourself (and yes, we're fixing installability, no fair knocking us for that.)
Now despite what you suggest, we love where the FSF's GPL3 is headed. For a variety of mechanical reasons, GPL2 is harder for us with OpenSolaris - but not impossible, or even out of the question. This has nothing to do with being afraid of the community (if it was, we wouldn't be so interested in seeing ZFS everywhere, including Linux, with full patent indemnity). Why does open sourcing take so long? Because we're starting from products that exist, in which a diversity of contributors and licensors/licensees have rights we have to negotiate. Indulge me when I say It's different than starting from scratch. I would love to go faster, and we are all doing everything under our control to accelerate progress. (Remember, we can't even pick GPL3 yet - it doesn't officially exist.) It's also a delicate dance to manage this transition while growing a corporation.
But most of all, from where I sit, we should put the swords down - you're not the enemy for us, we're not the enemy for you. Most of the world doesn't have access to the internet - that's the enemy to slay, the divide that separates us. By joining our communities, we can bring transparency and opportunity to the whole planet. Are we after your drivers? No more than you're after ZFS or Crossbow or dtrace - it's not predation, it's prudence. Let's stop wasting time recreating wheels we both need to roll forward.
I wanted you to hear this from me directly. We want to work together, we want to join hands and communities - we have no intention of holding anything back, or pulling patent nonsense. And to prove the sincerity of the offer, I invite you to my house for dinner. I'll cook, you bring the wine. A mashup in the truest sense.
Best,
Jonathan
President, Chief Executive Officer,
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Posted on 12:14AM Jun 13, 2007 | Comments[133]
Share this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted by Sisir Koppaka on June 13, 2007 at 12:31 AM PDT #
Posted by Nikesh Jauhari on June 13, 2007 at 01:33 AM PDT #
Posted by Meraj Khattak on June 13, 2007 at 02:22 AM PDT #
Posted by Theo de Raadt on June 13, 2007 at 02:25 AM PDT #
Posted by Zeno Davatz on June 13, 2007 at 02:42 AM PDT #
Posted by Adam Khel on June 13, 2007 at 02:57 AM PDT #
Posted by Jason Prado on June 13, 2007 at 03:17 AM PDT #
Posted by Graham Cantin on June 13, 2007 at 03:25 AM PDT #
Posted by javipas on June 13, 2007 at 03:30 AM PDT #
Posted by Ralf Eisenreich on June 13, 2007 at 03:38 AM PDT #
(maybe mark shuttleworth should bring dessert. the co-operation between sun and canonical is also very positive. redhat/suse are the past, ubuntu is the future.)
Posted by edouard tavinor on June 13, 2007 at 04:43 AM PDT #
Posted by Jim Thompson on June 13, 2007 at 04:58 AM PDT #
Posted by Raghu Nayak on June 13, 2007 at 05:23 AM PDT #
Posted by George Moschovitis on June 13, 2007 at 05:43 AM PDT #
Posted by Oren Goldschmidt on June 13, 2007 at 06:04 AM PDT #
Posted by Raphael Bosshard on June 13, 2007 at 06:11 AM PDT #
Posted by igb on June 13, 2007 at 06:39 AM PDT #
Posted by Tony Wasserman on June 13, 2007 at 06:48 AM PDT #
Posted by ivo welch on June 13, 2007 at 07:00 AM PDT #
Posted by Joe on June 13, 2007 at 07:34 AM PDT #
Posted by Joe Buck on June 13, 2007 at 07:35 AM PDT #
While I'm sure that your offer of dinner for Linux was sincere and honest, I can see how you have opened yourself up to a plethora of classic metaphors (perhaps "The Register" will have more) including
Linus Last supper
Linus being lead to the lions
Linus being fattened for the kill
Perhaps a better one would be
The lion laying down with the lamb
I'll leave it for discussion as to who is what!
Posted by Jim on June 13, 2007 at 07:37 AM PDT #
While I'm sure that your offer of dinner for Linux was sincere and honest, I can see how you have opened yourself up to a plethora of classic metaphors (perhaps "The Register" will have more) including
Linus Last supper
Linus being lead to the lions
Linus being fattened for the kill
Perhaps a better one would be
The lion laying down with the lamb
I'll leave it for discussion as to who is what!
Posted by Jim on June 13, 2007 at 07:38 AM PDT #
Posted by Pat on June 13, 2007 at 08:04 AM PDT #
Posted by TheLostAdmin on June 13, 2007 at 08:05 AM PDT #
Posted by joe vitka on June 13, 2007 at 08:10 AM PDT #
Posted by Geek Speaker on June 13, 2007 at 08:19 AM PDT #
Posted by osgeek on June 13, 2007 at 08:39 AM PDT #
Posted by Andrew Stöckert on June 13, 2007 at 08:42 AM PDT #
Posted by puzzled on June 13, 2007 at 08:43 AM PDT #
Posted by ns on June 13, 2007 at 08:50 AM PDT #
Posted by puzzled on June 13, 2007 at 08:52 AM PDT #
Posted by Bharath R on June 13, 2007 at 08:53 AM PDT #
While OpenSolaris still has a lot to do before being "the easy/best choice" (I would prefer RHEL for most cases, and please don't lie by saying that Solaris is cheaper, because It is not, and the outrageously aggressive entitlements are scaring people away), there is nonetheless true that the bugginess of the Linux kernel is continuously increasing, and this can't be fixed by an "upgrade" from GPLv2 to GPLv3!
OTOH, Linus might be right when saying "to Sun, a GPLv3-only release would actually let them look good", but this is only because the very noisy "license-Nazis" try to make people believe that GPL is "the only good license", or that Linux is widespread (more than *BSD, for instance) mainly because of the "wisely choosen" license--which is not true.
I fail to understand by which "mechanical reasons" is GPLv3 easier than GPLv2 for Sun, but I simply don't care what is the open license that will be used. I would simply be glad to have as much as possible open sourced, particularly because OpenSolaris needs to be adopted by a larger user community before being adopted by more companies!
We need OpenSolaris 11. Released. Soon. RELEASED.
We need an easy easy to D/L it. No registration. Plain FTP. Full ISO images. Period. Stop being freaky about DOWNLOADS.
We don't need software entitlements with KGB-like statements like: "14.0 During the term of the SLA and Entitlement, and for a period of three (3) years thereafter, You agree to keep proper records and documentation of Your compliance with the SLA and Entitlement." CAPISCI?
OpenSolaris would also benefit from KDE 3.5 for a broader adoption, I suppose.
Nexenta and Belenix and SchilliX are *not* what we need. They're jokes the same way Ubuntu is a joke.
I hope openSolaris will be used one day by an amount of people comparable with the Fedora + the openSUSE + the Debian communities. (Ubuntu users are unable to understand the meaning of the term 'stability'.)
I hope Linux will come to dinner. (But please, "for a period of three (3) years thereafter, You agree to keep proper records and documentation of" Linus coming to dinner...)
Posted by Béranger on June 13, 2007 at 09:08 AM PDT #
Posted by Raj K on June 13, 2007 at 09:17 AM PDT #
Here is my comment.
Posted by Béranger on June 13, 2007 at 09:26 AM PDT #
Posted by Sum Yung Gai on June 13, 2007 at 09:39 AM PDT #
Posted by MJ on June 13, 2007 at 10:02 AM PDT #
Posted by Tuomas on June 13, 2007 at 10:28 AM PDT #
Posted by Peter on June 13, 2007 at 10:32 AM PDT #
Posted by Levi on June 13, 2007 at 10:32 AM PDT #
Posted by inder on June 13, 2007 at 10:35 AM PDT #
Posted by adam cassel on June 13, 2007 at 10:43 AM PDT #
Posted by Tracy Reed on June 13, 2007 at 10:46 AM PDT #
Posted by KL on June 13, 2007 at 11:00 AM PDT #
Posted by Geek Speaker on June 13, 2007 at 11:02 AM PDT #
The relicensing takes time and effort comment you mentioned, is true. Mozilla took a long time to finish relicensing and I don't doubt the Linux would too even if a concerted effort was made. So, even though Linus hopes you're honest, he likely sees you more as a starry eyed dreamer, rather than someone who will actually follow up and change the Sun beaurocracy to be friendly to open source. (Linus doesn't care about Java and might not care about OpenOffice since he's a KDE user, so he doesn't personally see your current contributions to changing Sun are relevant to him.)
That being said, there is something you can do. ZFS is relatively new and it's already licensed under a very liberal license, the CDDL, so it should be possible to dual-license it as CDDL+GPLv3 much faster than relicensing all of OpenSolaris. Of course, Linux wouldn't be able to use it until it was GPLv3, but at least it would prove your sincerity and give a nudge to Linus to start the relicensing process of Linux as GPLv3 (or GPLv2+GPLv3). An alternative approach is the make the CDDL GPLv3 compatible. From the FSF licensing discussion ( http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/ ) the CDDL isn't that far from being GPLv3 compatible. So CDDLv2 removed the offending restrictions (and possibly replaced them with some GPLv3 compatible restrictions), and if OpenSolaris were relicensed as CDDLv2 (much easier to do than relicensing all of OpenSolaris, including the binary blobs), then that would remove any and all doubt of Sun's intentions (and your abilities to deliver on those intentions) and the nudge to relicense Linux under GPLv3 (or GPLv2+GPLv3) would be a lot stronger.
Posted by Robert Devi on June 13, 2007 at 11:05 AM PDT #
I applaud Sun's stance on ZFS. It has cost a fair amount of money to make this technology and the Java/OpenOffice applications available for all to use. The Linux and Open Source communities need to acknowledge that Sun should be able to make some money off its technology and products. There is no free lunch (except for Linus at Jonathan's house).
Posted by Daryl Smith on June 13, 2007 at 11:11 AM PDT #
On the other hand, I also see Theo raising some very important questions and would absolutely love to hear your opinion on that matters.
Posted by Zlatko Calusic on June 13, 2007 at 11:28 AM PDT #
Posted by Alejandro on June 13, 2007 at 11:28 AM PDT #
Posted by AT on June 13, 2007 at 11:29 AM PDT #
Honestly, I think Linux has a growth issue and its vast user base has to be nervous about it. Sun’s investment in Solaris might not have any impact on the share holder value for a while, but Linux has a lot of catching up to do.
Posted by Suresh Kumar on June 13, 2007 at 11:35 AM PDT #
Posted by David S. Miller on June 13, 2007 at 11:42 AM PDT #
What put me off was Sun's Solaris x86 politics and their Linux / (no) Java (inside) Desktop politics. Since then I can't make much sense out of Sun's strategy. Open-sourcing Solaris, but under an own, handmade license, specifically crafted to be incompatible with the GPL. And at the same time complaining about open source license proliferation. Pushing out new Java APIs, editions, and initiatives at a near-hourly rate, just to let most of them rot away. Hey, Sun can't even provide a RS232 Java interface for Windows any more. Vigorously protecting the Java source and protecting development behind the JCP, then suddenly open-sourcing Java, this time with the GPL. But of course spoiling the party by going for such a closed project setup that the RedHat guys felt the need to set up an own development "experiment". Can you say fork? Sun wants open source contributors, but first punishes potential contributors with a contract even lawyers can't decode. Sun can't get their OpenSolaris to run on their own gear, can't get good USB driver support into the regular Solaris, can't modernize userland in Solaris (awk vs. nawk, do I need to say more?), is seriously lacking behind on the Solaris desktop, doesn't manage to properly maintain Java any more but did mess with messing with Blackdown.org and with FreeBSD and is at the same time still adding features to the language.
It just doesn't make sense. Sun storms in one direction, then one half of the troops do a U-turn and storm in the other direction, while the other half continues as stubborn as before. The result is yet another train wreck.
For deities sake, provide the FOSS developers with the hardware specs they are asking for and maybe give them the driver code for the hardware under the GPL and BSD license. Give your lawyers a serious kick in the lower body parts and force them to write contributor contracts in plain English. Fix the license mess you created with the CDDL, the SPL, the SISSL, the SCSL, the SSC(FR)L, the JTL, the DLJ, the BCLA, the BCLA with supplemental license terms, the JRL, the JDL, the SLA, the Entitlement for Software, and whatnot your overeager, underperforming lawyers have created.
Posted by Jon Feder on June 13, 2007 at 12:06 PM PDT #
Linus' says ZFS is the only thing interesting about Solaris? That's one thing more than Linux has going for it.
Posted by Bryan Althaus on June 13, 2007 at 12:14 PM PDT #
Do not feed the troll :P
BTW no one should waste time reversing what others had done before. I like reversing for fun/research but I prefer good documentation. Both Sun and Linux community, has and could, benefit each other.
ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
Posted by Iker De Echaniz on June 13, 2007 at 12:28 PM PDT #
Posted by gg on June 13, 2007 at 12:56 PM PDT #
I realize that Sun is under new leadership now, but that still doesn't absolve them of past misdeeds. It's time to come clean and publicly apologize, and contribute an equal dollar amount to the open-source community in retribution for the damage it caused.
Posted by Daniel W. on June 13, 2007 at 01:09 PM PDT #
Posted by Gaurav on June 13, 2007 at 01:27 PM PDT #
This is shortsighted. If everything then there will be a few consequences:
* They will be ported to Linux (true)
* The user base will expand, making Solaris technology more popular
* Since Sun knows Solaris technology better than anyone else, it will have more consulting and support contracts
* Since the user base will expand, the "number of itches that need to be scratched" increase, meaning the number of contributers will increase to handle things actually need -- making Sun technology better.
* Unix open source history has proved that if you have a good make-configure script, it will be maintained to keep all ports active, so contrary to what's been said, Solaris won't be bled dry -- it's technology will be improved such that it will benefit Solaris too.
Posted by Robert Devi on June 13, 2007 at 01:29 PM PDT #
Posted by AS on June 13, 2007 at 01:41 PM PDT #
Posted by nobody on June 13, 2007 at 01:54 PM PDT #
Posted by retiarius on June 13, 2007 at 01:54 PM PDT #
(And yes, I know that's an old joke)
Posted by Simon Brocklehurst on June 13, 2007 at 02:21 PM PDT #
I've been a Sun customer since the beginning (and an alpha/beta tester back in the 80's). I'm also an OpenBSD user and a Linux user and a MacOS user. So...from my point of view, these internecine squabbles look as pointless as those between OpenWindows and Motif or v7 and BSD. The primary beneficiary of all of them is...
Microsoft.
Which is no doubt why in addition to spreading FUD as usual, M$ also does what it can to foment disagreement.
What's needed here, frankly, is to lock Schwartz and Torvalds and de Raadt and a few others in a room *with no lawyers allowed* and make a deal -- THEN inform the lawyers that their task is to write it up and make it happen. Done that way, there could be significant wins for everyone -- ZFS for Linux, specs for OpenBSD, drivers for Solaris, and so on. More important than those relatively ephemeral bits of technology would be the principle of such an agreement.
Or everyone can spend another decade sniping at each other while Redmond laughs.
Posted by Rich Kulawiec on June 13, 2007 at 02:27 PM PDT #
Posted by Mr. E. on June 13, 2007 at 02:50 PM PDT #
Particularly why Sun thought it was a good idea to pay $10 million for the right to use Linux (a right SCO could maybe not grant or is maybe not needed) and a covenant not to sue is still a big question. The Sun - SCO deal is a very good reason why Linus is not a big fan of Sun. According to the SCO v Novell documents Sun was even paying before Microsoft did cough up money. Sun set the precedence. Their money was the first in the SCO war chest. When SCO has to start scrapping the bottom of the barrel for money it'll be the Sun money they'll find and will let them go on for some more time. It really smells.
Or maybe Sun indeed payed $10 million for "SCO IP" in Linux. But "IP" which apparently turned out to be a few hundred trivial header lines. If this is what happened, then someone at Sun was rather stupid and wasted a big bundle of shareholder money. Very stupid for not checking what they got for their $10 million. Hey, I have a nice bridge to sell:
^^ ^^ .. .. [] [] .:[]:_ ^^ ,:[]:. .: :[]: :-. ,-: :[]: :. .: : :[]: : :`._ ,.': : :[]: : :. .: : : :[]: : : : :-._ _,-: : : : :[]: : : :. _..: : : : :[]: : : : : : :-._________.-: : : : : : :[]: : : : :-._ _:_:_:_:_:_:[]:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:[]:_:_:_:_:_:_ !!!!!!!!!!!![]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]!!!!!!!!!!!!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^[]^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^[]^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [] [] [] [] [] [] ~~^-~^_~^~/ \~^-~^~_~^-~_^~-^~_^~~-^~_~^~-~_~-^~_^/ \~^-~_~^-~~- ~ _~~- ~^-^~-^~~- ^~_^-^~~_ -~^_ -~_-~~^- _~~_~-^_ ~^-^~~-_^-~ ~^ ~ ^- _~~_- ~~ _ ~ ^~ - ~~^ _ - ^~- ~ _ ~~^ - ~_ - ~^_~ ~- ^_ ~^ - ^~ _ - ~^~ _ _~^~- _ ~~^ - _ ~ - _ ~~^ - ~^ -_ ~^^ -_ ~ _ - _ ~^~- _~ -_ ~- _ ~^ _ - ~ ^- ~^~ - _ ^ - ~~~ _ - _ ~-^ ~ __- ~_ - ~ ~^_- ~ ~- ^~ - ~^ - ~ ^~ - ~~ ^~ - ~Posted by Jon Feder on June 13, 2007 at 03:10 PM PDT #
Posted by Howard Owen on June 13, 2007 at 03:28 PM PDT #
Posted by Jake Vig on June 13, 2007 at 05:38 PM PDT #
Posted by Mikael Gueck on June 13, 2007 at 05:59 PM PDT #
Posted by Sam McDonald on June 13, 2007 at 06:02 PM PDT #
Posted by thetruebeliever on June 13, 2007 at 06:21 PM PDT #
Posted by Tim Hodkinson on June 13, 2007 at 07:36 PM PDT #
Posted by Sun multi OS guy on June 13, 2007 at 07:47 PM PDT #
Posted by Fred Snertz on June 13, 2007 at 08:00 PM PDT #
Great post and the right attitude from all of the top gentlemen involved. (Linus, Jonathan, and now Theo)
Good we're all friends: enough excercise of bargaining power on all sides.
There's enough of a cross-pollination agenda:
- Drivers for OpenSolaris
- ZFS for Linux
- Same stuff applicable to OpenBSD and the other BSDs around.
- Java at the core of Linux and Solaris as a response to the DANGER of M$ Singularity.
From there on:(M$ has managed to survive however inneficient and obtuse they've been, you don't want to wait until they actually have a real competitive product !!!)
Great work guys ! Keep rocking
Posted by vruz on June 13, 2007 at 08:46 PM PDT #
Posted by J2002 on June 13, 2007 at 09:22 PM PDT #
Posted by sumit singh on June 13, 2007 at 09:58 PM PDT #
Posted by Night on June 13, 2007 at 10:47 PM PDT #
Posted by Ritesh on June 13, 2007 at 10:51 PM PDT #
Posted by RamaRao Ayyagari on June 13, 2007 at 10:53 PM PDT #
Posted by Linus Torvalds on June 13, 2007 at 11:23 PM PDT #
Posted by 24.21.170.195 on June 13, 2007 at 11:38 PM PDT #
Posted by Greg DeKoenigsberg on June 13, 2007 at 11:45 PM PDT #
Posted by Jonathan Zeppettini on June 13, 2007 at 11:53 PM PDT #
There are at least five separate perspectives on this blog discussion alone: the non-commercial Linux (and other "free/libre" software) view, the open source (including "commercial" open source) view, the Sun/Solaris corporate view, the commercial hardware/software (e.g., Apple or Microsoft) view, and the single topic (e.g., specific hardware) view. That makes for a lot of different interest groups and wish lists, especially since many of us can identify with more than one of these views. (Speaking for myself, I was one of Sun's first ISVs and am a Sun shareholder, but now work for a university. I write this from within Firefox on my MacBook Pro, but I have another laptop that dual-boots Ubuntu Feisty and XP, though rarely the latter.)
So here's to Jonathan for trying to improve the lines of communication. He sets a good example for us all to follow.
Posted by Tony Wasserman on June 14, 2007 at 12:00 AM PDT #
1. Well on his Blog Jonathan says "Companies compete, communities simply fracture". What I do not agree with is that "communities simply" fracture. It sound disrespecting to communities, like the king sitting on the big throne talking about "hobbyists" as other people say. Companies fracture as well. Companies produce products and some of these products end up having a long life cycle where as other products end up having a very short live cycle. Btw. people "fracture" as well. I believe it is in nature to "fracture". It is a life cycle thing.
2. Communities cooperate but companies have to cooperate more and more as well if they want to prosper in the 21st century. Just because SUN had a great reputation does not mean they will have one in the 21st century. I believe Linux is about a highly sophisticated cooperation model. Modern companies should cooperate more like i.e. the Linux movement does with its professional kernel developers.
3. Well profit is what the stock market wants. That I can understand. But in the long run I believe great companies are about their customers and their satisfied customers. That in return returns the profit. Just doing profit for profits sake is not a long term business model for me.
4. Well yes, I believe Sun and MS will cooperate more in the future if that is what their clients want. I believe software users want more and more collaboration across platforms and software. I believe Sun and Microsoft will share and compete in the future as Gentoo and Ubuntu do. They compete but they still inter operate. The isolationistic approach of one standard for all does not work in a modern democracy, as everybody wants to be as individual as possible. So yes, if the customer profits you will see a collaboration between Sun and MS. Btw MS is trying to get into the Linux business by their own standard of doing businss: sining up with Novell, Linspire and a few others. That is the Bill Gates approach ;).
5. I believe great software is about individual leaders, great people and their compassion for software. Linus is a role model and he must be granted that leadership. The more companies like MS and Sun admit that them self the more they will prospers as well. In other words; the sooner SUN gives out their ZFS under GPLv2 the better for SUN! The faster SUN can learn and will prosper because they actively participate in a modern model of software development. SUN can profit heeps from the Linux software development model. I'm sure Blender is great as well but I believe that the Linux Kernel is the better role model.
6. Now this point is highly interesting. Who is looking on whom and who can profit from whom! That is indeed a very good question. I believe SUN can profit a lot more from Linux then Linux from SUN. With "profit" I actually mean learn. Learn and observe how the kernel development process works. Learn how GIT works. Use GIT to develop and improve ZFS. The question - to me - is not if it is in SUN's interests or not. The question is how fast SUN realizes that it is in SUN's interest to inter operate with the OSS world. I believe it is the companies who have to look to the Linux kernel development process and not vice versa. Of course both have great people but it is not only about the people but how to get the most from the developers and their creative minds. That is where Linus and the Linux development model excel more/ the most.
7. I do understand that SUN has liabilities to its customers, but: If the court needs to step into a new development process then the court needs to do so. Still I believe it is not about the court, its about the process to develop software in the 21st century. It is about interoperability and customer satisfaction. Linux customers are among the happiest in the world because the kernel model produces great software. Because the process of the Linux kernel model to produce great software works and is a 21st century role model. Linux also has compliance issues (SCO, Microsoft) but they do not build software "in fear of compliance" issues. They build software because they believe in the Kernel. Of course they respect the law and work within the law.
8. All I am trying to say is that Linux works as Software AND as business model. It is not exactly the same but look what happened with Linux. We have Red Hat,SuSE, Caldera, Gentoo, Ubuntu, etc. Some of them are listed on the stock market some art not. We have a huge playing field inter operating and competing at the same time. That is what I mean with "Linux is a 21st century role model". Yes, chefs have been copying recipes - in fact - nature has been copying itself over and over. That is true for languages. Japanese "copied" Chinese (Kanji) but then extended it to their needs. The OpenSource role model is a great model for Software and for Business, though it my not be identical.
9. You are returning to the fear of "Lawyers" again. I have it like Linus. Lawyers come after the software. Before the lawyers can act, they need a reason (i.e. software, divorce, etc.) to act upon. This is where the importance of the GPLv2 vs GPLv3 discussion steps in. Togehter with the whole difference between Software and Hardware. Linus is making good statements there as well. See this and this.
10. I will check out that book. Thank you for the hint.
Posted by Zeno Davatz on June 14, 2007 at 02:13 AM PDT #
I opened up an email conversation, calling for chipset documentation. Parties to the thread were yourself and a number of others, such as David Yen and Theo de Raadt of OpenBSD, as mentioned above. In the email thread that went on for several months, many nice sounding words were exchanged, as above, yet no action whatsoever has been forcomming. Why?
I am very bemused by the fact that I would not be able to perform my job as a Sun employee without OpenSSH. The Solaris ssh man page clearly states that OpenSSH is used and that Theo de Raadt is one of the developers.
Since Sun depends in part on OpenSSH to generate its income, why does Sun refuse to work with Theo de Raadt and open up chipset documentation?
Is this a case of: what's mine is mine, and what's your's in mine too?
As I stated in one of the earlier emails:
"Now Java is in the process of being opened up, as is Solaris, and in view of the above notes regarding "bring Linux to the SPARC platform", why not ask for chipset docs? Jonathan Schwartz seems to be keen on opening up as much as possible to create sales. He constantly blogs about how openness is the way forward. Why not call him on it WRT chipset docs?
Since OpenBSD can manipulate data in a Sparc processor, is it not too much to ask to get the data from the processor out across the host adaptors/PCI interfaces to the network/storage?"
And: "Sun is gaining momentum in becoming even more open .... and with the declaration that there is now a push on for Linux on Sparc, I thought that the time is right, as Linux will hit the same problems that OpenBSD now has WRT chipset docs."
As Theo points out above, "Two operating systems run on Sun's latest .. . machines, the v215/v245 -- Solaris and OpenBSD..... There are two operating systems which surprisingly do not run on ...[this]... Linux and OpenSolaris. OpenSolaris?? Yes -- Sun isn't even open enough to give the OpenSolaris community enough documentation to support their new machines." Hmmm. Are we talking but not walking?
I also stated in the email thread: "The reality is Sun sell computers. At random, an OpenBSD developer lists: the U1, the T2000, and V1280. OpenBSD never really had a problem with running code on the actual CPU for any of these. The ABI and CPU opcodes have to be documented so people can write applications, such as Oracle, that runs on them, in any operating system.
The issue is that people buy these COMPUTERS, which do have CPUs in them, but they also have host to PCI bridges, network cards and storage controllers. if you're writing an operating system like the OpenBSD developers do, you need to know how they work. The three computers listed above all eat the same CPU instructions, but their bus hardware and topologies are really different to each other. Knowing how the CPU works doesn't help run another OS on them. That is true for any "alternative" operating system that people want to run on these machines.
A demonstration of the above is that the OpenBSD kernel can be loaded onto these machines and they will actually start running, so the CPU is not an issue. However, on a machine that lacks documentation will quickly panic. Not because the CPU is mis-understood, but because drivers for the hardware in the machines are lacking. If the PCI busses can't be found, nothing else can be attached, such as network cards and storage. If the developers do manage to get PCI working, but don't have drivers for the devices on it, they become stuck again interfacing the network, storage, etc, etc."
In the email thread various concerns where raised by some Sun employees, and solutions were provided, then promises were made, but no documentation was made available.
There are many Open Source developers world wide that would like nothing more that to hack on Sun hardware without having to grope about doing reverse engineering. Since Sun uses Open Source software in Solaris, why not release docs for Sun chipsets so that more sales result?
Sun has opened up docs for CPUs because apps run on them. OSes also run on chipsets. So, from Sun's actions, it seems that Sun would prefer it if only Solaris is used on Sun hardware. This is just a case of a tree being know by its fruit, and calling a spade a spade.
Like I stated in my original email: "Jonathan and David, the ball is in your court. The community is calling on Sun to stand up like men and become more open. The alternative is to behave like other companies that continue to cower, emasculated, behind legal teams."
Posted by Craig Skinner on June 14, 2007 at 02:54 AM PDT #
Posted by Simon on June 14, 2007 at 02:55 AM PDT #
Posted by YodaJones on June 14, 2007 at 03:20 AM PDT #
Posted by Dick Davies on June 14, 2007 at 03:55 AM PDT #
Posted by Samuel Tauil on June 14, 2007 at 03:58 AM PDT #
Posted by Mps on June 14, 2007 at 04:45 AM PDT #
Posted by Todd on June 14, 2007 at 10:54 AM PDT #
Posted by Ravi on June 14, 2007 at 11:00 AM PDT #
Posted by 199.62.0.252 on June 14, 2007 at 11:53 AM PDT #
Posted by mike on June 14, 2007 at 01:31 PM PDT #
can you please work together
Thanks
Posted by Mike Smiley on June 14, 2007 at 04:01 PM PDT #
Posted by autooo on June 14, 2007 at 08:08 PM PDT #
Posted by iCode on June 14, 2007 at 09:32 PM PDT #
Posted by Thera on June 14, 2007 at 11:31 PM PDT #
I am a greatful user of all kind of technologies since i live from selling support and the best recomendations on which tecnology to use
for each purpose. But i have a few issues i want to share with you in order to repair my own profession, and to go further into selling
support and smooth tech services to all my clients in this city and others who may need me around the world.
This is a great moment to use this post to support all your work and explain my needs as the <u>best tech support around</u>
for non academics enterprises. Mostly because academics think that the advance of technology is their own creation.
Since i am not any kind of important person except that grandpa were the first to make multichannel transmission on a single 'wire' i'll explain you
what is the meaning of software technology to me.
I have been in a lot of trouble since i joined the open source community, the translation of the GNU to spanish, and a few proyects more involving
this kind of 'free' technologies./
I want you to join efforts to show me the difference betwen companies that support the open source movement (Including GNU) because i lost
most of my faith in development and computing.
I paid too much since i have been treated by a cracker by people who wanted to be like me (a computer support genius) so i have been in much trouble
for supporting all your movements in terms of offering computing services to the third world.
I would like to see a real joint betwen the Linux grous and the Sun corp, because there is where i put all my faith in technology.
Even i am a poor windows user with a few licences, i think that the world do not deserve to lost time in small diffs betwen a 'testing purposes'
Os like linux is, and a High End Corporate brick like Solaris is.
I used to work on both systems because my support profile were once high profiled in the three technologies which are Windows servers, Linux and Solaris.
Of course this happend a lot of times in my life, but that once were the perfect example.
Solaris worked 24/7 and only need to be mantained a few times when the corporative firewall hanged and the solaris became unstable.
Then i was one of the ones who had to restart and repair services a few times all with the level of account i had. (Dificult task for a beginner)
Linux were used on the intranet and as the web server for the call center, that were my second job as clients got solved their eternal Point to Point perfomance failures.
By the other side, Windows were on the corporate web servers and housing servers. Hard work for at least twenty people in the NOC.
Once i integrated perfectly the Linux in that corporation, the attacks begun,
First the Windows servers were defaced. Then the Sun DNS server were totally hacked, and finally i went out of job and most of the company
were fired by the administration of this American ISP. The ISP in my country broke, and were sold to a brazilian ISP were the salaries were 1/3
and plenty of lawyers well prepared to make precise agreements were the clients were who always lose.
That's the reality for the third world, but the only difference is that i am not a dummy.
That's why i ask you to really worry about what happend to the technology workers since year 2000 to be precise, perfectly starting with the year 2000 glitch.
I hope to get some answers from you, well trained and plenty of future geniuses in your companies because
i love computing, but the market has become so hard since year 2000 that i really think twice before
recomending any kind of technology at all.
Many thanks in name of all my tiny, small, medium and corporate clients.
Best regards
DMCC
Posted by DCC on June 14, 2007 at 11:46 PM PDT #
I tend to concur.
Posted by Jim Thompson on June 14, 2007 at 11:52 PM PDT #
Posted by Edward O'Callaghan on June 15, 2007 at 12:35 AM PDT #
Posted by john fowler on June 15, 2007 at 01:22 AM PDT #
Posted by ramarao ayyagari on June 15, 2007 at 03:10 AM PDT #
Posted by Vext01 on June 15, 2007 at 03:50 AM PDT #
Posted by wow poweleveling on June 15, 2007 at 05:01 AM PDT #
Posted by Linus Torvalds on June 15, 2007 at 05:27 AM PDT #
Posted by G Fernandes on June 15, 2007 at 05:55 AM PDT #
Posted by Shareholder on June 15, 2007 at 06:27 AM PDT #
Perhaps Sun should move to Linux for hosting SunSolve? Solaris doesn't seem to be able to cut it for running Sun's own customer-support websites. They're constantly slow, buggy, unavailable...
If Sun's grand strategy is to give away the product and make money on support, they'll be bankrupt before long. Sun's paid online support products are among the worst I have ever had to deal with.
Posted by Rob Levandowski on June 15, 2007 at 06:59 AM PDT #
Posted by melanie on June 15, 2007 at 08:06 AM PDT #
I realize that Linus is a very influential person in the area of Operating Systems in that he has contributed an idea of enormous and far reaching effect - Linux. However, his posts tend towards the petulant. I think that you actually lift him up and shield him from his total lack of sophistication by treating his claims so seriously.
Thanks for keeping your word vis a vis making Java and Solaris open source and keep up the good work. You and Sun need to make money, but if a little beneficence and philanthropy sneak in and make their presence felt, so much the better for Sun and the community.
Posted by Will Senn on June 15, 2007 at 11:53 AM PDT #
Posted by 128.151.79.32 on June 15, 2007 at 02:39 PM PDT #
Posted by 68.50.51.11 on June 16, 2007 at 03:31 PM PDT #
Posted by omgomg on June 17, 2007 at 01:46 AM PDT #
Posted by Gürkan Sengün on June 17, 2007 at 02:39 AM PDT #
Posted by no on June 17, 2007 at 06:03 AM PDT #
Posted by Criveti Mihai on June 17, 2007 at 10:52 AM PDT #
Posted by oBSD_Fanboy on June 17, 2007 at 10:46 PM PDT #
Posted by Osgood Hobgoblin on June 18, 2007 at 01:35 PM PDT #
Again, this has nothing to do with a conspiracy theory. Sun gave the money. The timing is, to say the least, "interesting". Sun refuses to discuss the issue. So what is the most obvious explanation? Sun was paying SCO to attack Linux.
I have a very simple question for Jonathan: What did Sun get in return for the $10 million, what did Sun pay SCO for?
Posted by Akar on June 18, 2007 at 02:16 PM PDT #
Sun does seem to suffer from DID but FUD and poisoning the well type rejections suffer more grievous fallacies.
If I were to prescribe treatment to the multiple personality disorder suffered by Sun and others would be to get rid of public corporate structure, go private and forget quarterly profit reports.
Image Sun's and Mr. Schwatz's abilities if they did not have to report to one-track minded share holders every three months.
Maybe I am wrong, wouldn't be the first nor the last time. Hey, Sun stock holders would you be pissed if Sun's actions and policies were for a public good and for a more substantial model on 10 or 20 year time lines - it would most likely kill the next quarter earnings.... ?Posted by Tom Davidson on June 18, 2007 at 04:09 PM PDT #
Posted by nobody on June 18, 2007 at 09:06 PM PDT #
http://blogs.sun.com/webmink/entry/hardware_archaeology
"Sun's engineers have actually designed chips specifically for the work at hand. ... Sun's engineers often had no business need to document the chip design .."
The OpenBSD project cosiders _any_ "lack of documentation" a "BUG". Here is the disconnect. Ive seen that Devices always outlive the "business need" of it's vendors.
He also wrote :
"The documentation may not exist. Writing it would require costly reverse engineering (even if people with the skills to do so are still at Sun)"
What does "even if" mean?
Im still dazed by the transparency, even if there is no "bottom line" to this to the community. Thanks Sun, Thanks Jonathan.
Posted by Deepak on June 19, 2007 at 02:16 AM PDT #
I hope, it's not to late. Big Blues OS dies painful death. Right now are the Microsoft's idiots about to destroy the rest of useful things on the planet. Talk to IBM bail out java, talk to Linus to survive at all. Those brilliant, internet wired brains are the only thing that outweights billions of Microsoft dollars. It's not for you, the sun or moon, it's for the amazingly cool humans and their children.
Thanks.
Posted by Doctor Who on June 19, 2007 at 04:01 PM PDT #
Posted by Chandra Shekhar Tewary on June 20, 2007 at 12:34 AM PDT #
Posted by Sean Kennedy on June 20, 2007 at 12:41 PM PDT #
Posted by Jim Thompson on June 21, 2007 at 03:12 AM PDT #
Posted by chris on June 22, 2007 at 12:21 AM PDT #
Posted by roger on June 22, 2007 at 02:05 PM PDT #
Posted by John Brahy on June 22, 2007 at 04:49 PM PDT #