Busy busy busybox
Posted Oct 2, 2006 21:13 UTC (Mon) by nix
In reply to: Busy busy busybox
Parent article: Busy busy busybox
You seem to believe that Linus wrote the entirety of what you see on a
Not only isn't that true, but the kernel is comparatively `sterile'; it
has odd requirements because it runs in kernel space and must be
self-contained, so its code isn't particularly reusable in other projects.
If you want the kings of reuse, look at BSD stuff: if you want the
projects and organizations that have spawned most other projects, look to
the FSF and the GNU Project.
If Linus had decided to use some other license, we'd be using a different
kernel. Big deal. The GPL would *still* be massively widely used.
If business loses interest in Open Source, then, well, we go back to the
status quo pre-1999: development slows to some extent, but certainly
doesn't stop, and the concatenation of work on earlier work continues.
I think your choice of terminology is instructive. Business is not
important to free software. It may be important to the vaguely-defined
pragmatic `Open Source', but it is not to free software. The business
world largely ignored free software while its toolchain climbed to
pre-eminence in portability, and while its Ada tools (in particular)
annihilated most competitors without even trying especially hard (and yes,
I know that ACT is a business, but once upon a time they were just some
hackers at NYU, and if need be they could go back to that, although it
would be annoying). The business world largely ignored free software until
the userspaces of most Unixes looked so outdated in comparison that they
were laughable. Even now, KDE (for instance) gets comparatively little
commercial backing (SuSE and Trolltech are the only major commercial
backers), yet it's powering ahead.
Take your business-world goggles off. They're blinding you.
to post comments)