ninjin
Joined 15 years ago
Karma
3,501
Submissions
800
Member since
Sep 4
Recent submissions
Comment · 7 hours ago
Comment · 2 days ago
Modification is the whole point of open source: "Unless you want to modify Windows, the closeness does not impact you". If you want to learn about how NetBSD looks at things, there is this page:
https://netbsd.org/about/redistribution.html
As for being compatible. Yes, FSF considers anything permissive to be compatible with their family of licenses. However, it is a one-way relationship in that permissive code can be freely used by GPL projects, but not the other way around as using GPL code would impose further restrictions compared to a permissive license.
Comment · 2 days ago
nano(1) is GPLv3 last time I checked and that imposes more restrictions than most (all?) of the rest of the code in NetBSD. It is not about being "reflexive", it is a violation of the very ethos of the project. Gnu rejecting non-free licenses from their own distributions is not "reflexive", it is simply not in line with what they want to achieve and one should respect that.
Comment · 11 days ago
Thank you, I think you are correct. Compare:
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports-cvs&s=ungoogled-chromium
To:
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports-cvs&s=firefox-esr
You will see that the Firefox patches are tagged for -release/-stable and the Chromium ones are not.
Comment · 11 days ago
I run -current these days on most desktops. What I can say is that since 7.9, I have experienced smoother audio playback and system load overall on my decade-old laptop. So, it is likely that others will experience similar things when moving to 8.0.
Comment · 11 days ago
> OpenBSD works well with relatively recent versions of Chromium and Firefox. That being said, they are on a six month release cycle. The Chromium port can fall behind if you stick to -stable or releases.
Just to clarify here, security patches are backported to -stable. So it is not like you stick to the same browser release for six months.
Personally, I run www/firefox-esr. In part because the ESR moves more slowly in general and in part because it is maintained by someone working for Mozilla.
Comment · 12 days ago
Neat little link trick for PDFs:
https://events.eurobsdcon.org/media/2026/submissions/ZGDXQR/...
Talked to bluhm@ after that talk in Brussels and the general feeling (from what I can remember from the conversation) so far is that there is a large increase in overall reports (good and bad), but that the severity of what is reported has not really increased. This also mirrors my own experience from reading source-changes@. In essence, it seems like we have known how to build secure software for the last thirty or so years, just that most do not seem to have bothered to do so.
Comment · 12 days ago
"Still uses CVS", I mean, CVS worked twenty years ago and it still works today for all the platforms OpenBSD supports. If you prefer something else, that is all right, but here is emulators/wine on CVSWeb:
Comment · 12 days ago
How is that ironic? If you know how to do this, ensure that the license of the code is compatible [1], and maintain the code, then send the patch to tech@ for review and maybe it gets in.
Comment · 12 days ago
"[Doesn't] get the job done"? Well, it gets my job done. You are welcome to use whatever you subjectively prefer (I use GNU's date(1) for a few scripts, but would prefer the English date grammar parsing as a tool of its own), but if you are unable to talk about anything in concrete terms there is not point in trying to discuss in good faith and I will just roll my eyes and move on.
Comment · 12 days ago
Plenty of issues that have been patched recently found using such tools as well. OpenBSD's policy remains largely the same as always: You need to understand the patch you propose and it needs to be maintainable. The link elsewhere in this thread is mainly discussing large patches where it is unclear if the LLM drew too heavily on code elsewhere.
Comment · 12 days ago
"Can't even match GNU's coreutils"? Care to elaborate? Last time I checked OpenBSD is pretty much in line with Posix and there are plenty of us that consider many of the GNU extensions to be anti-features.
Comment · 12 days ago
Nvidia support for OpenBSD is not really a thing [1]. With AMD and Intel, you have support for modern hardware in the tree [2,3].
[1]: https://man.openbsd.org/nv
I have read the majority of Stallman's writings, I have met and talked to the man himself, and I even secured a signed poster for myself and the local computer club. But, I find both the argument that sharing the code without viral restrictions and with viral restrictions plausible as ways forward to greater software freedom. Heck, I would argue that history shows that the diversity of tactics has proven successful and that we are better off today than ten, twenty, or thirty years ago. So, maybe refrain from boilerplate retorts as we have bigger fish to fry and shut up and hack?