At the moment I've build my systems, XFS kernel support wasn't that stable as ReiserFS, on my following system XFS will be the default (special since reiser and samba together is a slow combo)
The linux world is pretty split up, but since projects as LSB I beleive that's a good start. (altough time has to prove that, linux is anarchy (I love anarchy))
I doubt if there was a lot to modify
But they also contributed to the kde-project via konqueror, but what I meant was that taking the fact they used a complete existing os, they "payed back" with only some modifications to the things they used, without adding an extra value (unless in there own advantage). In my opinion apple got the best end of the "deal". (and under linux I still don't have a real quicktime)
If an open source product like bsd allready lived on for somany years without silently intergrating in microsoft os, I doubt that if Aqua etc. where opensource they would find there way into redmond too. (yust an example company, don't sue me Bill)
That doesn't mean they have to be on-line, months agoo I contacted gnu to ask some questions about lindows (I was a bit pissed of because I couldnt download the thing legaly) As long as you use unmodified gpl software, mentioning the use and version of that piece is enough, the source is available somewhere, the user (lindows) doesn't have to spread it themself.
In case of modifications THEY have to provide the sources to that, but that doesn't mean they have to put it open like on a public ftp site. It is alowed to provide the source after asking for it.
Yes thats possible, but who wanna do that?
There is no benefit, you end up with something that works, on that moment, with that version you used to adapt. No one other than you will ever use it, and everytime you start using another version of what you adapted will require adapting it again! If that's still possible, since the original developers have no intention to keep it usefull to you, and maybe will block your chance of adapting it again (by acsident or not)
No company will take that risk...
That prooves ones more that the only thing they do in the army is playing, or else they used another os

__________________
Groetjes Japie

You bet it is Anyone who wants to take propietary advantage of GNU sources, and doesn't want easy competition Not necessarily
You can use the original sources as the basic building blocks, and build on that, with no need to ever see the original developer's code.
As a true example, "MovieStacker". It was originally ( and a lot of the core is still ) based on FitCD. But it was released with "hooks" as I described above, so that it would be maintained by muaddib, the developer. If muaddib would have released all his sources, then other developers could have taken that code and either make another free better version ( good for all ), or do what muaddib did, and start selling it ( like the original developer of FitCD did, which now requires purchasing). That's where BSD license really shines, because there are no "strings" attached . I'm pretty sure the developer of FitCD didn't like a bit when he tried to compile the sources of MovieStacker, and found out that he couldn't because of missing modules
But it's perfectly legal, because muaddib followed the GNU license, and released the modified sources, but not his modules. So if someone really wants to release free code, then make it "Free" as in free, and not GNU. As above. you can build on the original building block, and leverage against the competition. That's why my personal choice has always been the BSD license, just because of that. I can share it, modify it, or do whatever I want with it, as long as I leave the credits on the sources and credits on my target application. For commercial developers, this is priceless
Yes. Their sonar system will now run on Linux, but their guided missiles are probably controlled by embedded BSDs

-kwag

Now I understand what you ment. I was more thinking in things like a web or mailserver wich is evolving every month. (but it's still possible then, as you discribed)
For people like Stallman it's a nightmare
But I stop fighting now, I think we shown allready enough how splitup the unix world is with our little flame fight, lets hug now

__________________
Groetjes Japie

Well, he's another (hippie) story Not at all
This is not a fight. It's actually a very good discussion, with different points of view
We've shown that both BSDs and Linux are excelent, with different licenses.
So they both can be mixed and matched, depending on the situation.
I use them both, and I'm VERY happy with both

-kwag

No hug?
Actualy you have shown me a view I didn't see before (or maybe unwilling to see?) and story's like moviestacker are a nice learning experience.
But that the unix world is split up is a fact (unfortunatly), there are a whole bunch off professional unix flavours, different linux distro's and a couple off bsd versions around wich are in some sort off way compatible but it will take another couple of decades before they have enough uniformaty to beat the redmont giant. The step from Apple to adopt bsd as base is nice, but if I compare the price of a powermac/osX to i386/M$ that won't change much by the big public. (Maybe os-X for i386 could change that)
But if a "standard" windows user is reading our previous treath, he's probebly so scared to get lost in a bush he won't try unix for the next 20 years or so...

__________________
Groetjes Japie

Shake hands I hope it doesn't take that long The problem is that Steve Jobs doesn't want OS X on any other platform. He's too jealous with his hardware
It would be GREAT to have OS X on Intel. That would make a big dent on M$ for sure That's possible. But then again, this thread might give them some hints as to what's available out there, and they can venture into new horizons

-kwag

To the average windows based used, *nix will always be a programmers, geeks, <insert your own description> operating system and therefore to use it, you need to be one on the list.

When things work in *nix, then the average windows user could work quite happily in the windowed world of Gnome, KDE or whatever you want. When things go wrong, the quickest fix and generally the only fix is to bring up your favourite terminal or drop down to console mode and fix the problem.

OS X may have gone a long way to address this, but then you still bring in the choice of hardware and and who has created it.

Cheers,

__________________
rhino

This is for the folks not familiar with linux (like myself, and even then I do not understand it that much), but it has excellent tips

http://www.geocities.com/tipsforlinux/index-linux.html

Totonho03