<corn>
what sorts of repetitive tasks do you write away with shell scripts? I don't really find myself needing to automate much
<corn>
maybe a script here or there but really not a lot
<dave0>
most of my shell scripts are mass-renaming of music/video files
<dave0>
or converting videos to mp4
<tp>
yet shell can be used for so much more
<corn>
In the past I've done the renaming or reformatting scripts, but that's what I mean when I say "here or there"
<tp>
it's a full programming language afaik, Ive seen a FreeBSD jail and VM manager written in only shell and it looked great and was fast
<tp>
sure debugging can be a bit painful, but I dont want python or lisp for my small apps
<corn>
I don't like bourne shell either so I avoid using it anyway, but usually the tools I have anyway mean I don't need to automate
<dave0>
there's a forth written in bash :-)
<corn>
bash is uncomfortable to me
<corn>
plan9 + rc spoiled me
<tp>
i know, I have it, and it's pretty good
<tp>
and one written in Perl, and thats pretty good
<crc>
corn: I automate things whenever possible for anything repetitive
<tp>
but RETRO is the only PC Forth I've seen that Id be comfortable replacing SH with
<corn>
I'm just curious what sort of repetitive tasks you run into that could be automated, because I don't really automate things and I can't think of anything I could/should be automating either
<crc>
e.g., for ebooks, I have an automated system that downloads, strips any drm, extracts metadata into a catalog, and generates copies in several formats
<crc>
I have automations which rebuild my tools, run regression tests, and report errors
<crc>
I have automation that updates my main servers hourly, including rebuilding html exports of my examples, most of my documentation, and snapshots
<crc>
at work, I have dozens of small tools that are triggered by cron and watching my email stream to generate reports and restructure incoming data to a more usable form for me to review (also handling sending acknowledgments when needed)
<crc>
literally anything I find myself doing often (as in at least monthly) should be automated if possible
<crc>
and as much as possible, I try to use my own tools to do so
<corn>
and now it's clear why I don't automate anything, I don't have those things to deal with
<crc>
I started down this road years ago. Automation means less typing and/or mouse, which reduces pain from rsi. It also increases productivity in the long run.
<nmz>
corn: an rc user, very nice
<nmz>
I need command completion though, got a way for that
<rdrop-exit>
(-_-)zzz c[] good morning Forthwrights
<corn>
nmz: unfortunately I do not
<tp>
rdrop-exit, good morning Zen Forth Guru!
<corn>
mornin
<rdrop-exit>
good mortning Master Forth tech (tm)
<rdrop-exit>
hi corn/crab1!
<corn>
how are we doing?
<rdrop-exit>
waking up, doing my morning coffee scan of the intertubes
<corn>
hm, it's about time for me to head off to start the night shift, it's nearly 9:00 PM here
<rdrop-exit>
night shift?
<corn>
I work from 10:00 PM to 6:30 AM
<corn>
except lately we have been leaving as early as 1:00 AM because more corona means less work
<rdrop-exit>
cool
<corn>
at least I'm still getting paid, I know others that aren't :)
<rdrop-exit>
right
<corn>
Anyway, happy forthing, enjoy your inner tubes
corn has quit [Quit: Lost terminal]
<rdrop-exit>
corn, enjoy your shift and stay healthy
iyzsong has joined #forth
dddddd has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<tabemann>
hey guys
<rdrop-exit>
hi tabemann
<tabemann>
busy working on my disassembler
<rdrop-exit>
cool
<tabemann>
I'm currently at ASR (going in alphabetic order)
<tabemann>
part of me wonders what the hell have I gotten myself into
<rdrop-exit>
writing a compact disassembler is an art
<tabemann>
I'm trying to reuse as many parts of the code as possible
<rdrop-exit>
yet another benefit of a tethered setup
<tp>
i have an assembler and dissambler on my hosted embedded Forth
<rdrop-exit>
most do
<tp>
not that I think a hosted Forth is superior to a tether because I dont
<tp>
a tethered cortex-m0 would be awesome
<tabemann>
cortex-m0 is exactly the kind of system that'd benefit from tethering
<tp>
tabemann, a tether would allow me to have a TON of development aids
<tp>
but the actual Forth and code for most things fits easily on a cortex-m0 which has 64kB of flash
<tp>
just not a giB of text development aids
<rdrop-exit>
I think all systems benefit from tethering, more options, less space
<tp>
rdrop-exit, definitely not *ALL*
<tp>
there are cases where a on chip Forth is s must and a tether utterly useless
<rdrop-exit>
sure, all, since it's entirely up to you how much or how little you put on the target
<tp>
no, thats C thinking
<rdrop-exit>
has nothing to do with C
<tp>
sure it does
<rdrop-exit>
no it doesn't
<tp>
does,does,does .. and no returns!
<tp>
;-)
<tp>
ok, I need a Forth system to reverse engineer a circuit, will a tether do ?
<tp>
this circuit is in the engine bay of a rare Russian military vehicle broken down in the Andes, 500 miles from anywhere
<tp>
there is no local power
<tp>
I cant tell you anything about it, you have to find out whet is is when you get there
<tp>
you have to lug all the gear by backpack to get there
<tp>
the obvious weakness of a tether is that when disconnected form the host, it is NOT interactive
<rdrop-exit>
you're thinking too narrowly, a thethered force doesn't force you to always use the tether
<rdrop-exit>
* a tethered forth doesn't
<tp>
but if it has a on board forth, it's NOT a tether is it ?>
<tp>
i mean, it IS tehtered or it is NOT tethered
<tp>
?
<tp>
if it's NOT tethered, then it is not interactive
<rdrop-exit>
you can produce anything you want on the target, including a full custom onboard forth
<tp>
you may as well say that a C program is interactive, thats my C connection above
<rdrop-exit>
you're thinking too narrowly
<rdrop-exit>
you can cut the umbilical whenever you want, or chose not to use it
<tp>
I have the field experience to know the difference, but I'm willing to be educated at any cost :)
<tp>
it seems to me that you believe that every Forth is 'tethered' whether interactive in the true Forth sense or not
boru` has joined #forth
boru has quit [Disconnected by services]
boru` is now known as boru
<tp>
if a tether can produce a fully interactive Forth on a chip, then that is not tethered, even if produced by one
<tp>
your tether requires a PC and fair enough, it's perfect for bench development etc
<rdrop-exit>
You're missing the main point by focusing only on the word tether
TCZ has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<tp>
it wouldnt be the first or last time I've utterly missed the point, so apologies if I'm being particularly dumb today
<rdrop-exit>
A tethered development setup doesn't force you to only produced targets that require a tether
<tp>
i understand that clearly
<tp>
but a interactive Forth produced by and independent of a tether is not 'a tethered Forth it is a self hosted Forth
<tp>
at least that's how I see it
<rdrop-exit>
sure, but you're only looking at the target, not how the target was produced in the first place
<tp>
I only care about the target as thats what Ill be using
<tp>
a self hosted Forth can be used to do anything in the field
<rdrop-exit>
well we're talking on how that self-hosted Forth was produced in the first place
<tp>
a tethered fort cannot as by definition, once the umbilical is severed, it's no longer interactive
<rdrop-exit>
argh
<tp>
I have one here
<rdrop-exit>
forget the word tether for a minute
<tp>
it's a working tethered Forth
<rdrop-exit>
argh
<tp>
our argument centres on the word "tether" ?
<tp>
without how can we argue this point ?
<rdrop-exit>
listen for a minute
<rdrop-exit>
are you ok with that?
<tp>
of course
<rdrop-exit>
lets say you are choosing a Forth development environment for you projects
<tp>
k
<rdrop-exit>
let's say you use a PC as your cross-development machine
<rdrop-exit>
being a Forther, your ideal development environment is a Forth of course
<rdrop-exit>
So you have a Forth on your PC
<tp>
k
<rdrop-exit>
You can use that Forth to develop Forths for targets
<rdrop-exit>
and/or assembly programs for targets
<tp>
k
<rdrop-exit>
You can for some targets choose to just generate an target image and get it onto the target by whatever means possible
<rdrop-exit>
You can also use that same PC Forth to interact with some of your targets via a tether
<rdrop-exit>
all possibilities are open to you, you have a Forth on your PC, you can produce Forths (or whatever) for targets
<tp>
k
<rdrop-exit>
The key is that you use a Forth to produce whatever at least initially goes on the target
<tp>
k
<rdrop-exit>
You have a tether should you want to use it on a particular project, you are not forced to use it
<tp>
k
<rdrop-exit>
you can use this Forth on your PC to produce onboard Forths for your targets if that's what you want for that particular target
<tp>
k
<rdrop-exit>
you are not forced to use your PC Forth to produce a tethered target Forth, if that's not what you want on a particular project
<tp>
k
<rdrop-exit>
the key is you have Forth on your PC, helping get whatever you need on a target
<tp>
k
<rdrop-exit>
the Forth on your PC takes the place of typical non-Forth IDEs, debuggers, editors, etc...
<rdrop-exit>
whatever you need
<rdrop-exit>
or want
<rdrop-exit>
or shell scripts or whatever
<tp>
ok
<tabemann>
I think what tp wants is there to be a REPL on the target hardware
<tabemann>
so you can attach a serial line to a device and boom there's a REPL by which code can be entered right away
<tabemann>
you can have that with a tether
<tabemann>
but then you need to have a tether essentially create a hosted forth
<tp>
not with either of my two working tethered forths
<rdrop-exit>
So the key aspect of a tethered Forth environment is that you have a dedicated Forth cross-development environment on your PC to help you produce whatever you want on the target INCLUDING if you want it a fully function onboard Forth with all the bells and whistles including an outer interpreter if you want it (aka REPL)
<tabemann>
isn't the target of mecrisp across really small?
<tp>
tabemann, tiny, it's a target binary only, absolutely no Forth
<tp>
rdrop-exit, thanks for the long explanation
<rdrop-exit>
You replace most of your PC-side tools and scripts with Forth
<rdrop-exit>
no sweat
<tp>
tabemann, a MSP430 blinky is about 100 bytes including the startup code and init vectors
<tp>
tabemann, and thats for my most bog-standard, unimaginative forth blinky code
<rdrop-exit>
I always liked Frank Sergeant's expression:
<rdrop-exit>
"Let's your Forth and my Forth do lunch"
<tp>
haha
<tp>
he's a character
<rdrop-exit>
It's a good summary of what I was trying to explain, Forth on the PC used as a cross-development environment for a (possibly completely different) Forth(s) on the target(s)
<rdrop-exit>
Forth on the PC imho should be prefered over the typical plethora of Gnu tools and bash scripts, makes files, etc...
<rdrop-exit>
used for making targets
<rdrop-exit>
not to speak of typical non-Forth IDEs
<rdrop-exit>
In fact what I'm describing is the main use of commercial PC Forths from Forth Inc and VFX, to act as a cross-development enviroment for their target Forths
<tp>
yes
<rdrop-exit>
Wo don't need no stinkin Gnu assembler :)
<rdrop-exit>
Take crc's Retro for example, it's not geared to be put on an embedded target, but you could probably build a great cross-development environment on it
<rdrop-exit>
I'm just guessing, haven't really looked at it yet
<rdrop-exit>
Anyhow, the main point of my diatribe is Nirvana is a Forth on the PC and Forths on the targets
<tp>
sure, it should run on embedded, but that embedded target would need 1MB flash and 384kB ram
<tp>
rdrop-exit, yes I can see your main point :)
<crc>
rdrop-exit: that's on my long term todo list...
<rdrop-exit>
cool :)
<tp>
and I think crc is looking at purchasing a suitable target for a embedded port of RETRO
<rdrop-exit>
also cool :)
<tp>
can nothing stop RETRO ????
<crc>
yes; hoping to start on this later this year
<rdrop-exit>
fun fun fun
<tp>
crc, right after the economy reopens to a post Coronavirus utopia ?
<crc>
tp: once I can get things at home settled into a new normal so I can have a proper workspace again
<tp>
crc, yes, this Coronavirus thing has really turned our plans upside down
<tabemann>
hashforth seems to me like a suitable environment - of course it almost certainly does not compare to retro :)
* tabemann
put in the kitchen sink when he implemented hashforth
<tabemann>
all it needs is a garbage collector
<tabemann>
its main drawbacks is lack of much in the way of POSIX call interface
<rdrop-exit>
cool tabemann
mark4 has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Vedran has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Vedran has joined #forth
reepca` has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
reepca` has joined #forth
WickedShell has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<tp>
tabemann, I couldnt get hashforth compiled on FreeBSD you may recall
<tp>
it not your fault
<tp>
FreeBSD is different to Linux and a lot of Linux developed apps wont work on it
gravicappa has joined #forth
mtsd has joined #forth
xek has joined #forth
rdrop-exit has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
rdrop-exit has joined #forth
dys has joined #forth
reepca` has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
reepca`` has joined #forth
siraben has quit [Quit: killed]
jimt[m] has quit [Quit: killed]
rdrop-exit has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
jimt[m] has joined #forth
mtsd has quit [Quit: mtsd]
mtsd has joined #forth
rdrop-exit has joined #forth
mtsd has quit [Client Quit]
siraben has joined #forth
rdrop-exit has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
mtsd has joined #forth
rdrop-exit has joined #forth
rdrop-exit has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
rdrop-exit has joined #forth
rdrop-exit has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
dddddd has joined #forth
TCZ has joined #forth
rdrop-exit has joined #forth
<crc>
tp: hashforth builds and runs on freebsd and openbsd if using `gmake` and `clang`
dys has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
mtsd has quit [Quit: mtsd]
mtsd has joined #forth
<tp>
crc, thanks, Im certain thats what I used last time but I'll check it again, now you mention it
<tp>
crc, hmm that was easy :)
<tp>
all working now, I cant remember what went wrong last time
rdrop-exit has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
rdrop-ex1t has joined #forth
dys has joined #forth
dave0 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
dave0 has joined #forth
dave0 has quit [Quit: dave's not here]
mtsd has quit [Quit: mtsd]
rdrop-ex1t has quit [Quit: Lost terminal]
mark4 has joined #forth
MrMobius has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
MrMobius has joined #forth
mark4 has quit [Quit: Leaving]
iyzsong has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
tabemann has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
TCZ has quit [Quit: Leaving]
xek has quit [Quit: Leaving]
djinni has quit [Quit: Leaving]
djinni has joined #forth
<veltas>
tp: Yes, I remember my FreeBSD venture and building from source, very hit and miss it was
<veltas>
I always use GNU Make makefiles, I tried writing POSIX Make stuff but it's just more limited
<veltas>
And FreeBSD people know to try 'gmake'
<veltas>
BSD people in general
<crc>
I work to make sure my Makefile is compatible with BSD make and gmake. I won't make someone install gmake just to build my system.
Zarutian_HTC has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<veltas>
crc: I do agree with this in principle
<veltas>
But nobody actually uses my software, if people did I would consider making it more compatible
<veltas>
I tell you what though, needing to install gmake (or just read the makefile and convert it / figure it out) is wayyyyyy less egregious than what most repos I see on github today require
<veltas>
Was helping someone with a project recently and about 50 perl, python etc packages in I was fed up and stopped
<veltas>
Do you use a BSD crc?
dys has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Zarutian_HTC has joined #forth
<crc>
I use openbsd on my dev system and freebsd on my main servers
<veltas>
Ah nice OpenBSD
<veltas>
I want to try OpenBSD but I guess I stopped caring about my OS a long time ago, just want whatever's easiest
<crc>
not very complete yet (text display, keyboard, cmos, parallel ata disk support, and a block editor)
<crc>
but it does work on my test systems (qemu, and an ancient thinkpad), booting via GRUB
<crc>
or john_cephlapod's impexus (https://github.com/jmf/impexus), which is also retro, but uses an assembly version of the VM instead of the C version. Slightly worse on the driver front at this point, as he's rewriting his assembler to be a bit easier to work with, but I hope to flesh this out once he's done
* crc
still has a lot to do on this. It needs partition table parsing, and doesn't support interrupts yet
<crc>
I should look into UEFI booting and interfacing at some point
deesix_ has joined #forth
dddddd_ has joined #forth
dddddd has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
deesix has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
dddddd__ has joined #forth
deesix has joined #forth
dddddd_ has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
deesix_ has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
<veltas>
crc: Nice, something I might try out
<veltas>
Especially if I end up doing any UEFI stuff at work, and then maybe anyway
dddddd__ is now known as dddddd
ntry has joined #forth
ntry has quit [Quit: Leaving]
TCZ has joined #forth
dave9 has quit [*.net *.split]
WilhelmVonWeiner has quit [*.net *.split]
dzho has quit [*.net *.split]
dzho has joined #forth
WilhelmV1nWeiner has joined #forth
dave9 has joined #forth
reepca`` is now known as reepca
<veltas>
"With the huge RAM of modern computers, an operating system is no longer necessary, if it ever was."
<veltas>
What did Chuck Moore mean by this?
<MrMobius>
What is the sound of one hand clapping?
<veltas>
I read it and thought I understood it, and then read it again later and realised I don't know
<C-Keen>
with this amount of memory you don't need a lot of abstractoin simulating coherent memory anymore, I think is what he meant
<tp>
veltas, I was referring to building Hashforth, I never have *any* trouble building Unix apps on FreeBSD. RETRO built in about 0.1 second here first time ever.
<Zarutian_HTC>
isnt an RETRO vm basically just half a dozen or so .c files max?
<veltas>
as all things should be
<tp>
Zarutian_HTC, the entire release of RETRO is only 4.2MB inc doc
<crc>
Zarutian_HTC: generally one or two .c files
<Zarutian_HTC>
I have fiddled with the idea of using something like retro vm for implementing non britle build systems
<crc>
http://forth.works/retro-unix.c for a single file .c combining the vm and image; a quick `cc -lm -O2 retro-unix.c -o retro` is all you really need to get started
<veltas>
tp: I used FreeBSD for probably a year or two overall and I had issues building a number of projects that had clearly only been tested on Linux, Windows and maybe MacOS if you're lucky.
<Zarutian_HTC>
mainly because x86 will loose its dominance as desktop or tablet or what have you cpu arch
<veltas>
Even ones that had supposed support for FreeBSD often hadn't been tested on FreeBSD in years and had many time consuming flaws to be fixed before building
<Zarutian_HTC>
(arm and risc-v come to mind)
<tp>
veltas, what do Linux, Windows have in common ?
<tp>
non POSIX
<Zarutian_HTC>
tp: lots of testers
<tp>
Zarutian_HTC, lol, yeah but what is the quality of such 'testers' ?
<veltas>
I don't use many "POSIX" programs, people tend to rely on stuff that's post POSIX
<tp>
I'll take one FreeBSD tester over 500 Linux testers anyday
<tp>
to me, Linux is now the new windows
<Zarutian_HTC>
tp: in the sense they try your thing and if they dont get it working easily then they complain
<tp>
Zarutian_HTC, in the sense that Linux has become easier than windows to install, absolutely zero admin skills needed
<tp>
coupled with the fact that Linux is free, the userbase now includes millions that have zero computer skills
<veltas>
It's weird you care about POSIX so much anyway because it's a *standard*, like Standard Forth, or ISO C, that people can wax lyrical about but that very few people actually understand properly or write conforming code for
<Zarutian_HTC>
yebb plus windows has become more and more obnoxious to try to use
<veltas>
And then even if you do you get to use something that's a lowest common denominator designed by committee
<tp>
veltas, I have no problem with Linux being non POSIX, Linux is welcome to go in any direction it wants, I have no horse in that race now
<veltas>
I think they're right, I think decisions like not breaking userspace etc were always more important than conforming to standards
<tp>
veltas, I do like standards, I believe they are essential for what I do and have always done, but remember these are my opinions only, I'm not trying to change the mind of any Linux user
<veltas>
A lot of people know Linus Torvalds has a strong opinion about adding C++ to the kernel, and C programmers like these arguments. But a lot of those C programmers don't know Linus also has no time for "standard C", and instead works with a language that works well for him
<Zarutian_HTC>
veltas: not breaking userspace is a kind of standard. More praxic than declaritive.
<veltas>
And for his system
<tp>
personally; I see Linux mutating faster and faster these days, way too fast for me, I'm too old for rapid change
<veltas>
Zarutian_HTC: Not on BSD it's not, the FreeBSD mindset was "break userspace if it's 'wrong'"
<tp>
thats why I abandonded Linux in 2016 after using it non stop as my only OS since 1997
<tp>
and that includes first trying Linux Yggdrassil in 1994
<veltas>
I just think standards are a tool and people tend to think they're an argument on their own a bit more than they should
<veltas>
Conforming is not an argument on its own, I hope something that any forther will appreciate to an extent lol
<Zarutian_HTC>
i think many people that refer to standards as final answers are unwittingly apealing to authority
<tp>
veltas, Red Hat programmers have felt to write their own 'cool code' and abandon POSIX, but that kind of thing has fractured the Linux userbase. Many Linux admins fled for friendlier shores such as *bsd after that
<tp>
myself included
<veltas>
Why is abandoning POSIX a bad thing?
<tp>
why is it a good thing ?
<veltas>
Are you making an argument?
<veltas>
And why did this become a camel back breaking issue in 2016?
<tp>
no, I'm not a programmer as you know, I dont like people breaking my OS as it's a tool for me, I only use it to work
<Zarutian_HTC>
veltas: I do not know about POSIX but relentless update for update sake is utterly stupid specially when working with hardware
<veltas>
tp: So Linux broke your stuff?
<veltas>
Linux has broken stuff for me as well, some reasonable some less so. All OSs do though, Linux seems to give me the easiest time of it at the moment
<tp>
no, Linux and I were becoming estranged in the early 2000's, it took me ages to find a replacement and it was systemd that finally drove me to defect to FreeBSD as a Linux refugee
<veltas>
I'm not loyal, I'll switch immediately if they start making it bad for me
<veltas>
Zarutian_HTC: What stuff are they doing that's an update-for-update's-sake?
<tp>
Linux rules the world now, I have nothing against it and I'm sure that Linux makes an awesome car radio with minimal boot time, I just have no interest in it as a workstation
<Zarutian_HTC>
tp: oh the ways I hate systemd. It pollutes the search space for a much interesting thing, doesnt start deamons propperly, gets in the way of debugging why s system isnt booting and so on
<veltas>
tp: Yes I also tried FreeBSD, and I think it was partly because I was concerned about directions like systemd. I just found it wasn't worth it, and it wasn't a short stint I have. I just agree with FreeBSD principles a lot less than Linux.
<tp>
Zarutian_HTC, but for me, my main reason for disliking systemd is the way it was forced onto the Linux userbase
<veltas>
I like some FreeBSD principles, like their idea of roughly "if you can do 90% of features in 10% of the code it's usually the better solution"
<tp>
veltas, Im not political about this, I like freebsd for it's design, I couldnt care if the designers ate live babies
<Zarutian_HTC>
veltas: one particular linux update that costed my hours was to never enumerate and assign usb devices to /dev/ files in same way change they made
<veltas>
And then there are the arguments I had multiple times with FreeBSD decision makers about stuff in their system implementations that would absolutely be more likely to break code in hidden and annoying ways, and they defended it because code that broke was 'wrong'
<veltas>
tp: I'm not talking politics, just tech
<tp>
Zarutian_HTC, Linux seemed to fix usb device naming for a while, now it seems broken again
<Zarutian_HTC>
veltas: this was for usb to serial bridges on a machine that has about 50 year service life
<tp>
veltas, FreeBSD has one MASSIVE advantage over Linux tech in my opinion, namely ZFS
<veltas>
Zarutian_HTC: Yeah Linux updates have broken stuff for me as well
<tp>
now Linux cannot EVER distribute a bootable ZFS file system, incompatible licenses
<veltas>
Zarutian_HTC: The issue is that OSs always break stuff, but the guidance in Linux makes a lot more sense to me for not breaking it than FreeBSD etc's direction does
<Zarutian_HTC>
veltas: yes which means those updates get turned off permanently
<tp>
of course that hasnt stopped Linux distros trying every trick they can to get around the ZFS license
<Zarutian_HTC>
veltas: shittly written oses break stuff. And I am talking about the software writing methodology here not the end product
<veltas>
Yes
<veltas>
And FreeBSD convinced me they don't care about this as much as they care about certain other things
<veltas>
And it drove me away. And in my real empirical experience I've had less abrasion working on Linux than FreeBSD as well. Not to say it's perfect, it isn't.
<veltas>
I have a lot of issues with Linux, number one is the bloat
<Zarutian_HTC>
hence why the machine now runs QNX now
<Zarutian_HTC>
oh, yes I agree that linux seems to attract bloat more than FreeBSD
<veltas>
They're better than MS at bloat, but that's not saying much!
<tp>
Zarutian_HTC, you run QNX on your pc ?
<Zarutian_HTC>
tp: what is so different with the ZFS license?
dddddd has quit [Quit: dddddd]
<tp>
Zarutian_HTC, it's not GPL compatible
<tp>
it's that simple
<tp>
being CDDL I think
<veltas>
So you can't use ZFS with Linux?
<tp>
veltas, of course you can, you can install it yourself
<veltas>
ZFS's main development branch targets Linux
<Zarutian_HTC>
tp: no, on a 'control pc' of a machine that does interesting things with metals
<tp>
veltas, every distro has a ZFS package
<veltas>
Yes, well, licensing is an unfortunate thing on every OS I use. I am certainly used to extra steps installing proprietary or incompatible software to make e.g. my graphics work
<tp>
Zarutian_HTC, metals like uranium ?
<veltas>
It's not a deal breaker, I don't really see how it could be either.
<Zarutian_HTC>
tp: I use osx or win7 or that rpi debian. Depending on which 'pc' I am using
<tp>
veltas, yeah, thats all it is, but it means if you want a bootable ZFS on Linux it's going to be a lot of work
<Zarutian_HTC>
tp: nope metals like iron and blends
<veltas>
Unlicense ftw
<tp>
Zarutian_HTC, Viking Waraxes!
<Zarutian_HTC>
tp: i suppose that is one of the possible products
<crc>
unlicense, being a public domain dedication, may not be usable everywhere
gravicappa has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
<veltas>
crc: If it's not then other open source licenses aren't usable in that sense either, right?
<Zarutian_HTC>
what I have noticed regarding eulas and copywrite licenses that most peeps in my industry or relared dont give a damn so long they get the source code so they can fix problems that sometimes have no other ways to be fixed
<crc>
no; the public domain is not a universal concept
<veltas>
I think it's very sad we live in a world where I can't put text in public and convince people they're not going to get sued for using it
<crc>
some countries (like germany) don't allow for it
<tp>
veltas, i guess I'm saying that I came to FreeBSD as a Linux refugee the same way I came to linux as a windows refugee, and in both cases I was hoping the new OS would do what the old one did. In BOTH cases I found the new OS superior in ways I coundnt imagine
<Zarutian_HTC>
crc: nor is the 'AS IS' legal figleaf
<tp>
and so I stayed
<crc>
an open source license says that you hold the copyright, but allow others to use and modify and distribute (to varying degrees) the source
<Zarutian_HTC>
crc: germany allows that you put your works in the public domain but you cant abicate your right of authorship.
<crc>
Zarutian_HTC: I didn't remember the exact details on that
<veltas>
I'm not a lawyer and all this is over my head
<Zarutian_HTC>
the right of authorship is not copyright but to be known (even just psuedonymously) for your works
<veltas>
Frankly it feels like people have ideological excuses for not using these kinds of licenses, because I don't really see how these rigidities of copyright law affect this kind of license and not e.g. MIT
<veltas>
But I am not a lawyer so this is just me being paranoid
* crc
stopped using public domain type dedications long ago; less headaches to use a well established open source license instead
<veltas>
crc: Weirdly the only headaches come from people who tell me I should conform and use e.g. MIT
<tp>
crc, same here
<Zarutian_HTC>
I made the mistake asking a german Pirite Party guy that was really interested in the subject about it.
<crc>
veltas: if you want to incorporate code from others orhave your code used in products from others, an actual license is helpful
<veltas>
I do have a license
<veltas>
I noticed sqlite managed to run an open source project with a public domainish license
<tp>
crc, and don't want to spend $millions in court after your product becomes a best seller ?
<veltas>
It feels like the complaint here is "well you can't actually have this licence because the thing you claim is actually something you have the right to renege on in some countries"
<veltas>
Which isn't really an argument, it's just saying "well people might not trust you" okay.... I can handle that
<crc>
sqlite also requires contributors to submit sigted affidavits of public domain dedications and offers a commercial license for those who may run into legal issues with the status
<veltas>
I'm sure there is actually a legal connotation somewhere.... I don't understand it though, I am not educated in law
<veltas>
crc: I would offer such a license as well, to anyone who asked
<veltas>
Because I don't care, and if someone voluntarily requests a licence that gives me legal power to sue them, then so be it
<veltas>
And if my lawyers permit it I shall also wink at them and tell them "still not going to sue you though"
<veltas>
I have an issue with modern law, I know.... I'm sure most of you don't care. I will stop now
<crc>
would you get signed affidavits from contributors to provide a legal record of waiving copyright protections?
<veltas>
No but good luck suing me over this
<veltas>
I want to see precedent
<veltas>
Not even GPL gets upheld in court and the terms there are *very* clear, and actually fit copyrights better
* crc
does deal with using open source software in commercial settings; I do have tohave licenses reviewed by lawyers: (
<crc>
veltas: it's more about you being able to sue the users h]tahn the other way around, in my case
<crc>
s/h]tahn/than/
<veltas>
I don't want to sue the users though
<crc>
what about your descendents? or others whose contributions you use?
<veltas>
I guess I might be oversimplifying but if I ask someone who is a 'lawyer' they are probably a sheep, like if I ask a programmer what a good OS is they will just say "MacOS" or "Linux" with no understanding.
<veltas>
Unless they were an expert I wouldn't really care what they said about a license
<veltas>
And I don't think all people in a profession are experts
<veltas>
But this is just my 'filter' for reasoning here since it's a field I am ignorant of
X-Scale` has joined #forth
* crc
doesn't have a choice in this case; when working for a company, their rules matter
<veltas>
Yes I know
<veltas>
I also work for a company
X-Scale has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
X-Scale` is now known as X-Scale
<veltas>
I will say that in general I think corporate culture contains an awful lot of stuff that isn't really productive, correct or consistent
TCZ has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<veltas>
So I do not take cues from how people work for how to run my personal ventures, instead I will question what they do the same way I question anything that I distrust
<veltas>
crc: it is frustrating sometimes living in a society where I can't just put something totally innocuous out there without making some liability for someone or myself