Reply
Thread Tools
Posts: 757 | Thanked: 2,910 times | Joined on Mar 2009
#41
I'm surprised that nobody brought yet this link: http://wiki.maemo.org/Fremantle_closed_packages

It has list of Fremantle's closed source package and their current state. It could contain more information (e.g. what functionality is missing if package is dropped out).

If you know more than wikipage has, please fill it. Maybe there should be more links to the threads where alternative package is discussed (or discussed to drop entirely).

*
What other closed source bits there are than those packages? I can say NOLO-bootloader and flasher-tool. Is there something else?
(Offtopic1: Do we have open source flasher, or only cold-flasher? http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=80840 )

(Offtopic2: Is this most recent state of NOLO-hacking? http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...5&postcount=25 )
 

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to AapoRantalainen For This Useful Post:
woody14619's Avatar
Posts: 1,380 | Thanked: 2,907 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#42
Originally Posted by SD69 View Post
The next cell phone running Unix will probably be a Blackberry with QNX. It's not a relative of maemo. I doubt it will be easy to port maemo stuff over (would love to be wrong).
Having hacked about a bi tin QNX for work and on the 3Com Audry (yes, a long time ago) I can tell you... QNX = Mess. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

Did they go opensource when I wasn't looking? Last I knew it was all still pretty closed, with a rather large NDA and license fee to even get partial access.
 

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
danramos's Avatar
Posts: 4,665 | Thanked: 5,425 times | Joined on Jul 2008 @ Springfield, MA, USA
#43
Originally Posted by AapoRantalainen View Post
I'm surprised that nobody brought yet this link: http://wiki.maemo.org/Fremantle_closed_packages
WOW! Look at ALLLLL that openness! :P
__________________
Nokia's slogan shouldn't be the pedo-palmgrabbing image with the slogan, "Connecting People"... It should be one hand open pleadingly with another hand giving the middle finger and the more apt slogan, "Potential Unrealized." --DR
 

The Following User Says Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post:
danramos's Avatar
Posts: 4,665 | Thanked: 5,425 times | Joined on Jul 2008 @ Springfield, MA, USA
#44
Originally Posted by sulu View Post
Maybe that UNIX discussion would become less heated when we start to talk case sensitive and distinguish UNIX, Unix and unix(oid).
There actually is no difference when you apply case-sensitivity to UNIX (or Unix). However, you're the first person I've ever heard using the term 'unixoid' although it's common to see people refer to Linux, BSD and others as *nix or UNIX-like over the years that I'd worked in and out of Silicon Valley. Where I was entertained by Copernicus, your posting is just eye-rolling silly. Here, let me help you a little bit with some light reading material: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix

Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
Here's my question: how can you tell the difference? All these various OSs have the same underlying philosophy, the same features, run the same software (at least with respect to open source code, which is most of what I use) -- if you don't call them Unix, just what do you call them? If you say you prefer Linux to Unix, just what is it about Linux that you prefer? It does have a different licensing scheme, and as you note, it was written independently from the original AT&T codebase; but these things have no impact on day-to-day usage...
How can you tell the difference? Well, if you're a coder you MIGHT be able to tell the difference when your code has to differentiate between libraries. If you're a system admin, you MIGHT be able to tell the difference when various devices are referred to differently (i.e. eth0 versus hme, eri, or any number of names depending on the driver). If you're a simple command line user, you might also notice when your commands work very differently in UNIX versus using GNU utilities (i.e. df lacks -h or using 'ps -ef' instead of 'ps aux' and so on).

They're similar enough to get used to both--but they're clearly different. Thankfully, the GNU stuff can easily be brought in to replace the pure UNIX stuff in most of these UNIX OS's like Solaris, AIX, IRIX, HPUX, and the various array of actual UNIX OS's that I've had to work with over the years.

They're different enough to really KNOW the difference when you try to work with them--especially on a day-to-day basis--but thanks to POSIX and to the GNU, they CAN be similar enough to mitigate those differences pretty easily if you try.

BTW: Trivia fact for you to ponder in case you didn't learn this along the way... GNU is an acronym for 'GNU is Not UNIX', thusly making my point EVEN more painfully obvious. Here's their website where they even state as much, JUST in case you questioned my accuracy: http://www.gnu.org/ ...you'll note they call their operating system 'UNIX-like' instead of calling it a UNIX or using that weird 'unixoid' term you made up.

heheh.. AT&T purist. You're a funny guy. Eventually, with enough practical experience and knowledge, someday you too will know enough to hold up your own end of a conversation, though. Keep learning, lad!
__________________
Nokia's slogan shouldn't be the pedo-palmgrabbing image with the slogan, "Connecting People"... It should be one hand open pleadingly with another hand giving the middle finger and the more apt slogan, "Potential Unrealized." --DR
 

The Following User Says Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post:
Posts: 455 | Thanked: 1,017 times | Joined on Jan 2011 @ Germany
#45
Originally Posted by danramos View Post
There actually is no difference when you apply case-sensitivity to UNIX (or Unix).
Yes, there is. It makes a difference if you write UNIX or Unix. For a first explanation you might want to read the 2nd paragraph of the Wikipedia article you linked.

Originally Posted by danramos View Post
However, you're the first person I've ever heard using the term 'unixoid'
Well, as you can see I'm from Germany. Here "unixoid" is a common term for "somehow resembles Unix but is neither fully compatible nor a direct descendant of it". Linux would belong to that category. Maybe this word is only a local phenomenon that I wasn't aware of.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to sulu For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,523 | Thanked: 1,989 times | Joined on Jul 2011 @ not your mom's FOSS basement
#46
Originally Posted by danramos View Post
There actually is no difference when you apply case-sensitivity to UNIX (or Unix). However, you're the first person I've ever heard using the term 'unixoid' although it's common to see people refer to Linux, BSD and others as *nix or UNIX-like over the years that I'd worked in and out of Silicon Valley. Where I was entertained by Copernicus, your posting is just eye-rolling silly. Here, let me help you a little bit with some light reading material: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix



How can you tell the difference? Well, if you're a coder you MIGHT be able to tell the difference when your code has to differentiate between libraries. If you're a system admin, you MIGHT be able to tell the difference when various devices are referred to differently (i.e. eth0 versus hme, eri, or any number of names depending on the driver). If you're a simple command line user, you might also notice when your commands work very differently in UNIX versus using GNU utilities (i.e. df lacks -h or using 'ps -ef' instead of 'ps aux' and so on).

They're similar enough to get used to both--but they're clearly different. Thankfully, the GNU stuff can easily be brought in to replace the pure UNIX stuff in most of these UNIX OS's like Solaris, AIX, IRIX, HPUX, and the various array of actual UNIX OS's that I've had to work with over the years.

They're different enough to really KNOW the difference when you try to work with them--especially on a day-to-day basis--but thanks to POSIX and to the GNU, they CAN be similar enough to mitigate those differences pretty easily if you try.

BTW: Trivia fact for you to ponder in case you didn't learn this along the way... GNU is an acronym for 'GNU is Not UNIX', thusly making my point EVEN more painfully obvious. Here's their website where they even state as much, JUST in case you questioned my accuracy: http://www.gnu.org/ ...you'll note they call their operating system 'UNIX-like' instead of calling it a UNIX or using that weird 'unixoid' term you made up.

heheh.. AT&T purist. You're a funny guy. Eventually, with enough practical experience and knowledge, someday you too will know enough to hold up your own end of a conversation, though. Keep learning, lad!
...you just went over 9000 with your reply. Congrats!
 
Kangal's Avatar
Posts: 1,547 | Thanked: 1,260 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#47
I just know *nix but its like its censored so instead resort to typing "linux" and that way more people understand.

unixoid isn't bad, but certainly not common. It would be like saying unix-ish or unix-like, aunix (a means false in Latin). How about un-unix abbreviate it to "un-IX" ?
__________________
Originally Posted by mscion View Post
I vote that Kangal replace Elop!
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to mscion For This Useful Post

I'm flattered
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kangal For This Useful Post:
Posts: 97 | Thanked: 140 times | Joined on Mar 2011
#48
If you're going to call all POSIX compliant OSes UNIX based, you would have to include Windows in that grouping (the Windows kernel has a POSIX compatibility layer that's 100% POSIX compliant, which is actually more than Linux) and we all know that isn't true.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Sazpaimon For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,513 | Thanked: 2,245 times | Joined on Mar 2006 @ US
#49
Originally Posted by woody14619 View Post
Having hacked about a bi tin QNX for work and on the 3Com Audry (yes, a long time ago) I can tell you... QNX = Mess. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

Did they go opensource when I wasn't looking? Last I knew it was all still pretty closed, with a rather large NDA and license fee to even get partial access.
Thanks for the technical info about QNX. I have to say the Playbook with OS 2.0 based on QNX is a nice product from a user standpoint.

The reason I brought it up is that will be RIM phones in 2012 based on QNX. Not knowing what Nokia will end up doing, these may be the only commercially available *nix phones in 2012. With Qt officially supported, If they can be rooted like the Playbook was, then I see potential.

I'd rather drop the semantics about Unix and Linux, and focus on what *nix phones or *nix phone software are next after fremantle.
__________________
3-time Maemo Community Council Member
Co-Founder, Hildon Foundation
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SD69 For This Useful Post:
Posts: 470 | Thanked: 397 times | Joined on Jul 2011 @ Croatia
#50
Originally Posted by danramos View Post
Ironically, iOS is based on Darwin (Mach 3), based on BSD, and thus IS a UNIX OS. heheh.. finally, someone got their history right whether they knew it or not. (Since Android runs Linux, yes--it's not UNIX in the least.)
i love this quote about unix:
"Unix was not designed to stop its users from doing stupid things, as that would also stop them from doing clever things." Doug Gwyn

osx may be based on unix and be somewhat unix compliant, but its not unix, not from an usability standpoint nor from the philosophical standpoint
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GrimyHR For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
buysomethinelse, not again!!, waaaahmbulance

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:00 AM.