Readit News logoReadit News
spauldo commented on Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools   larr.net/p/namings.html... · Posted by u/todsacerdoti
BoppreH · 5 days ago
Thanks, I'm not a car guy. I double checked with Wikipedia, but clearly I don't even know where I'm supposed to look.
spauldo · 5 days ago
Yeah, V8 is the shape of the engine - 8 cylinders in two rows offset at an acute angle (i. e. V-shaped). Likewise a V6 has the same number of cylinders as an inline 6 but performs very differently. There's a handful of different engine shapes - I'm fond of the rotary engines used in early aircraft. Traditionally, the name of an engine was just the year, the manufacturer, and the displacement (like 1965 Ford 352). You often leave off the year and even the manufacturer if it's not required by context.

The Ford 351 is a bit special because there were two different engines made by Ford in the same time period with the same displacement, so they tacked on the city they were manufactured in (Windsor or Cleveland).

spauldo commented on Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools   larr.net/p/namings.html... · Posted by u/todsacerdoti
Sniffnoy · 5 days ago
Yacc is Yet Another Compiler Compiler, not Yet Another C Compiler. It's useful for writing compilers, not for compiling C.
spauldo · 5 days ago
Especially since, IIRC, it actually predates C.
spauldo commented on YouTube is taking down videos on performing nonstandard Windows 11 installs   old.reddit.com/r/DataHoar... · Posted by u/jjbinx007
Lendal · 2 months ago
Manufacturing and automation is another big one. Think about a water plant that is air-gapped but needs computer automation software to run. These things are everywhere, in every town that has indoor plumbing and sewer. The specialized software that automates these plants only runs on Windows. It relies on industrial hardware and touchscreens that are designed for use in harsh outdoor environments. All of these types of plants rely on high school educated operators that need to understand what's going on at a simple level. Having an OS that in any way relies on Internet access is a non starter. A Linux based system would be removed within a year of operation. You could get it approved maybe if you really worked at it but it would not be accepted in the long run, after the initial startup. There are physical constraints, technical constraints, and human/political constraints that are all working against Linux.
spauldo · 2 months ago
A Linux-based system would be identical to a Windows-based system as far as operator experience goes. They interact with HMI software and only see the OS underneath when Windows pops up silly notifications and errors.

Windows owns the industrial space for historical reasons, mostly to do with OPC being Windows-only and software for doing maintenance on field devices originally running on DOS. It quickly became a chicken-and-egg situation - everyone wrote their software for Windows because everyone else wrote their software for Windows. SCO owned a decent chunk of the field before that, but we know how that worked out.

We're seeing some change now that OPC is being phased out. Ignition now has feature parity between Linux and Windows (barring OPC, of course). Windows won't go away any time soon (if ever), but you can now have a fully functioning SCADA system with no Windows at all.

spauldo commented on Let's Help NetBSD Cross the Finish Line Before 2025 Ends   mail-index.netbsd.org/net... · Posted by u/jaypatelani
pjmlp · 2 months ago
I was there, hence why it it easy to get quotes like these,

> 1998: Many major companies such as IBM, Compaq and Oracle announce their support for Linux.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux

Without big money from UNIX vendors like those, cutting down their R&D costs, Linux would not have climbed anything.

GPL was the reason why they collaborated instead of being able to assimilate the code as they were doing with BSD, like anything sockets related.

Ironically IBM has recouped its investment, now as Red-Hat owners.

That is where everything on GNU/Linux that is mainly done by Red-Hat like GNOME, Gtk, GCC, Java is being paid for.

spauldo · 2 months ago
Yeah, I was there too.

The three companies you list are horrible examples. IBM is kind of a UNIX vendor, sort of, but not like Sun or DEC. They sell solutions, and the solutions that use AIX don't overlap with what Linux was capable of in 1998. I'd argue that, given their complete disregard for Tru-64 and pretty much all things DEC, Compaq was never a UNIX vendor - they just inherited a bunch of legacy systems they needed to support. They certainly didn't push for new Tru-64 based systems. Oracle wasn't a UNIX vendor at all and wouldn't become one for quite some time.

BSD sockets are also a bad example. They were the reference implementation, paid for by DARPA. The entire purpose of BSD sockets was to be copied into other operating systems. You'll notice that Linux copied them as well.

IBM and Compaq invested in Linux because they wanted something that ran on their lower-end server hardware and could handle web traffic. Oracle invested in Linux because they wanted to be the backend to all these new websites that were cropping up.

IBM, Oracle, and Compaq didn't give a rat's ass about the operating system code - they wanted the platform. If Linux had never happened and FreeBSD became the new hot thing all the online hackers were talking about, the result would have been exactly the same. They'd have poured money into the projects rather than trying to make their own thing because that's the financially sensible thing to do. The UNIX wars were over, and proprietary software lost.

Meanwhile, the last major UNIX vendor - Sun Microsystems - was giving away its own source code under the CDDL. FreeBSD ended up adopting a lot of it. That's the complete opposite effect from what you're talking about.

Sun got involved in the GNOME project and even deprecated their own CDE desktop in favor of it. Was it because it was GPL? No. It was because they saw that all the new desktop software was coming out of the Linux community, who didn't have access to CDE. Even if GNOME had been BSD licensed they would still have switched to it, because they were still trying to keep the workstation market alive at that point and CDE was quickly becoming irrelevant.

As far as I can see, the only companies interested in taking operating system code were the network appliance vendors and Apple. It only worked for them because they didn't care about compatibility.

spauldo commented on Let's Help NetBSD Cross the Finish Line Before 2025 Ends   mail-index.netbsd.org/net... · Posted by u/jaypatelani
pjmlp · 2 months ago
That is the wonder of BSD like licenses for big corps.

If Linux never happened, we would still be using big iron UNIXes, each taking whatever they felt like from BSD variants.

Notice how all the new FOSS operating systems for IoT devices none of them use GPL, NutXX, FreeRTOS, Zephyr, Arduino libs, IDF,...

spauldo · 2 months ago
No, we wouldn't. Linux climbed its way up to overtake proprietary UNIX despite being less capable, which it very much was at the time.

Linux came around at the right time when the Internet was going public and regular people had access to hardware that could run a decent UNIX. People latched onto it because it was free and an interesting project. The free BSDs were just late enough to the party that they missed out on the momentum.

All the proprietary UNIX vendors (other than SCO) relied on expensive proprietary hardware sales. Intel ate their lunch while they were too busy stabbing each other in the back to notice. Linux killed SCO because SCO was, quite frankly, overpriced crap.

None of this had anything to do with the license, other that the fact you could use it for free. It was all about hardware availability, the rise of the Internet, the wave of new IT people who had experienced Linux at home, and the fact that Linux on Intel was good enough to replace those pricy proprietary machines.

Now, you wanna talk Apple, there's where your code "theft" kicks in. But that's a whole different thing.

spauldo commented on Let's Help NetBSD Cross the Finish Line Before 2025 Ends   mail-index.netbsd.org/net... · Posted by u/jaypatelani
kosolam · 2 months ago
It’s so annoying that none of the corps using it aren’t putting a cent in and they ask individual developers to donate. Meh
spauldo · 2 months ago
I doubt NetBSD gets much use by "big corps." It's used by hobbyists, researchers, and universities.
spauldo commented on Let's Help NetBSD Cross the Finish Line Before 2025 Ends   mail-index.netbsd.org/net... · Posted by u/jaypatelani
sammy2255 · 2 months ago
What is NetBSD?
spauldo · 2 months ago
NetBSD is the slim, small, traditional BSD that has an emphasis on clean code and portability. It's great for small jobs and it'll run on that old SPARC that's collecting dust in the closet. It's simpler than FreeBSD (the industrial strength BSD) and doesn't have the hyper focus on security that OpenBSD does.
spauldo commented on Let's Help NetBSD Cross the Finish Line Before 2025 Ends   mail-index.netbsd.org/net... · Posted by u/jaypatelani
nobodyandproud · 2 months ago
Every Linux distro has different goals. But a unified kernel (more or less).

For hardware, can a single device driver be made for all variants of BSD? If so, then I agree.

spauldo · 2 months ago
You aren't going to see OpenBSD share a kernel with anyone - it's too different and makes trade-offs the others won't accept. And NetBSD doesn't need the heavyweight kernel FreeBSD uses.

From what I've seen, the BSD community swaps code around on a regular basis. But they pick and choose what code to use based on their own goals. It seems to work pretty well.

spauldo commented on Let's Help NetBSD Cross the Finish Line Before 2025 Ends   mail-index.netbsd.org/net... · Posted by u/jaypatelani
lukaslalinsky · 2 months ago
I'm curious what do people use NetBSD for?
spauldo · 2 months ago
It's my nameserver/DHCP server. I used to have it set up as an iSCSI target for backups and as a boot server for my firewall, but I do something else these days.

My main reason for using NetBSD for this is to have easy access to the man pages. Like the other BSDs, the man pages are exceptionally well-written and are a tremendous resource for doing POSIX programming. Plus I find myself digging through the code when I'm interested in how something is implemented. Having a local repository of good C code with a liberal license is worth having the extra OS to manage.

spauldo commented on Let's Help NetBSD Cross the Finish Line Before 2025 Ends   mail-index.netbsd.org/net... · Posted by u/jaypatelani
jrmg · 2 months ago
NetBSD is a powerful force for sustainability. Foundation's commitment to running on a vast array of hardware—new and old—helps reduce e-waste. Old laptops and single-board computers that would otherwise be in a landfill are given new life as robust firewalls, file servers, or even retro-gaming machines, all thanks to NetBSD.

Emotionally I like this - but thinking more dispassionately, these systems use, by modern standards, a huge amount of power. I wonder if, for many (most?) of them, it whould not be more environmentally responsible to replace them with modern, less power-hungry devices.

spauldo · 2 months ago
Yeah I don't buy that argument either. The amount of e-waste being saved by NetBSD is so tiny as to be insignificant.

NetBSD is great for retrocomputing, since it's a modern OS that can run on very limited hardware. It's also a very nice traditional UNIX. It's well documented, has a nice codebase, and is a pleasure to use. But for saving e-waste, Linux has it beat.

u/spauldo

KarmaCake day568May 20, 2020
About
Just an old UNIX guy doing SCADA for a living and Lisp for play.
View Original