From: Adam (suckmy-balls.com)
Date: Fri Dec 17 2004 - 11:47:22 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 11:35:59AM +0100, Atle Kristensen wrote:
> Read this more carefully: http://www.openbsd.org/goals.html

This has nothing to do with anything, learn to read.

> 3ware has refused any attempts to publish information, so why should
> the OpenBSD-developers integrate a unknown binary file in their source?

WTF are you talking about? I very clearly said the freebsd twe driver.
Go look at it, it is a 2 clause BSD license, and has no binary blobs
involved. The management tool from 3ware is binary only, but its also
not needed, and was never part of this conversation.

> Following your experience - isn't better to use FreeBSD since they like
> to include everything that compromise their license, just to please
> the(ir) users and vendors?

You should take the time to read before replying.

> Ever better, avoid to use 3Ware, there is other vendors which is more cooperative. (?)

No, actually there aren't. 3ware has helped create an open source, 2
clause BSD licensed driver for freebsd that works, with no binary
anything involved. That's just as good as any other raid controller
vendor has done, so the worst you could claim is that they are the same
as the other vendors.

> Search the archivers, this was discussed heavily for a few month ago.

No, nobody mentioned that openbsd wrote their own driver that doesn't
function, instead of porting freebsd's working driver. I simply want to
know if a port of freebsd's driver would be accepted, or if someone
would insist on trying to fix openbsd's driver instead.

> "say NO to binaries!" :)

Say NO to replying to mailing lists while high.

Adam

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]