How far is any BSD from being 100% BSD-Licensed and 0% GPL-Licensed reddit / BSD ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Square365 · 2021-07-14 01:12 Im planning to migrate from Linux to BSD, mostly because Linux is GPL and i don't want to contribute to the GPL "pandemic". But if I remember correctly there are a few bits that are GPL licensed and that alternatives are being developed... Which BSD "distro" is the one with less GPL? Also, does anybody know where can I search software by its license? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- reddit_original · 2021-07-14 01:23 Keep yourself out of trouble. Never refer to any BSD as a "distro". There is no such thing. Each is a BSD variant of the original system and each is a complete but different operating system unto themselves unlike Linux where every one of them is different and only the kernel is the same. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- dynseli · 2021-07-14 01:29 The closet you'll get is OpenBSD, and it lacks a lot that other BSD's have. The best that can occur is an operating system with many Apache licensed programs. Anything GPL and Apache licensed can readily be absorbed by GPL applications. You'll need GPL or Apache licensed programs for end user applications. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- dagit · 2021-07-14 02:28 The viral part of the GPL only applies to code changes of GPL'd code. Using a GPL'd program on a BSD licensed OS doesn't affect you. The only way it would is if you wanted to modify that GPL'd program and then distribute your modified changes. The GPL just says you have to provide access to the source at the same level of distribution as the non-source (like a binary). Personally, I don't think the viral aspect of the GPL is all that bad. For pretty much any software I write from scratch, I use a BSD or MIT license, but sometimes I think I should use GPL. If I wrote a tool or library that I want to use at work, it's kind of nice to make it GPL, because If I make it BSD, there is a chance my employer could keep an improved version locked up and if I change jobs I would lose access to it. But if I had made it GPL, they would be forced to share the improved version (although, only if they distribute the improved version). Also, plenty of code on Linux system is non-GPL. The big exception is the kernel but these days that's just one small (but significant) part of what people tend to mean when they say "OS". ---------------------------------------------------------------------- tcmart14 · 2021-07-14 07:03 To piggy back here. I don't get to upset over licensing, I feel as long as the license sums up the original developer's intent, I am fine with it. After all, who am I to say what license someone should use. Might like the original commenter, some code I write I feel should be GPL. I make a determination for what license depending on the use I want it used for. As an example, I wrote my own HTTP server, it isn't great, but a proof of concept. It is BSD licensed. However, if I wrote some amazing algorithm that vastly sped up protein folding simulations, you bet I would GPL it to keep it available to any researcher who wanted it. I evaluate based on intent and impact. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- JamesElstone · 2021-07-14 07:31 www.freshports.org for FreeBSD ---------------------------------------------------------------------- vermaden · 2021-07-14 10:12 FreeBSD is VERY close to be 100% GNU free. ​ Details are here: ​ https://wiki.freebsd.org/GPLinBase ---------------------------------------------------------------------- daemonpenguin · 2021-07-14 14:02 This isn't true and has not been for a long time. There are lots of BSD distros: NomadBSD, GhostBSD, FuguIta, Midnight BSD - they're all the same userland and kernel as their parent with a slightly different configuration or mixture of tools pre-installed, exactly like the GNU/Linux distributions. I'd also like to point out the "D" in BSD stands for Distribution so saying there isn't a BSD distro is literally ignoring the name and point of the original BSD flavours. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- demetrioussharpe · 2021-07-14 14:12 MidnightBSD isn't a distro, it's a fork. It doesn't have an upstream. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- reddit_original · 2021-07-14 14:26 >they're all the same userland and kernel as their parent with a slightly different configuration or mixture of tools pre-installed And they are all the same BSD they are based on which is exactly my point. You are either running FreeBSD, for example, or you are not no matter which way it gets packaged up. >exactly like the GNU/Linux distributions. Absolutely false! Relatively few Linux distros, out of the tens of thousands that exist, are forks of the original Linux distribution of a complete operating system. ALL of the BSD forks you mention above contain the original BSD they came from! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- reddit_original · 2021-07-14 14:27 Exactly my point. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Brotten · 2021-07-14 20:35 FreeBSD lists it along NomadBSD and GhostBSD in a way that makes me think it's a distro, though. If you feel strongly about it, you might drop them a line on that topic. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- demetrioussharpe · 2021-07-14 21:01 The FreeBSD group is absolutely wrong in that regard. Here's a blurb from the [MidnightBSD "about" page](https://midnightbsd.org/about/): "MidnightBSD was forked from FreeBSD 6.1 beta. The system was forked to allow us to customize and integrate the environment including the ports and system configuration. We wish for the system to appeal to beginners as well as more experienced BSD users. Many operating systems are under active development; with MidnightBSD, we wish to focus on optimization and usability improvements for desktop users." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- demetrioussharpe · 2021-07-14 21:04 I'm not sure whether or not Lucas knows about this, so I'll drop him a line. He may not care, or it's even possible that he's said something about it -IDK. Either way, it's more appropriate for him to handle that, since it's his project. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- demetrioussharpe · 2021-07-14 21:13 After taking a look at the [FreeBSD Advocacy Project Page](https://www.freebsd.org/advocacy/myths/), it seems that they gave the correct information on MidnightBSD based on what the MidnightBSD site says about itself. There's no contention here. ​ The FreeBSD site says: "MidnightBSD is a FreeBSD derived operating system developed with desktop users in mind. It includes all the software you’d expect for your daily tasks: mail, web browsing, word processing, gaming, and much more." ​ The MidnightBSD site says: "MidnightBSD is a FreeBSD-derived Operating System. A critical goal of the project is to create an easy to use desktop environment with graphical ports management, and system configuration using Xfce. The vast majority of the operating system will maintain a BSD license. Certain software packages use other licenses such as X.org, GCC, and GNUstep. MidnightBSD was forked from FreeBSD 6.1 beta. The system was forked to allow us to customize and integrate the environment including the ports and system configuration. We wish for the system to appeal to beginners as well as more experienced BSD users. Many operating systems are under active development; with MidnightBSD, we wish to focus on optimization and usability improvements for desktop users. The FreeBSD project has developed a reliable server operating environment, but often usability and performance on the desktop is overlooked. Scheduling, allocation of resources, security settings, and available application support should be tailored to desktop users. Many of the BSD projects are tailored to servers or older hardware. Others are distributions of FreeBSD with a nice graphical user interface, but still suffer from server-centric design under the hood. We did not fork FreeBSD as a result of a falling out, but rather as an excellent starting point. It should be viewed as a compliment to the FreeBSD developers who have worked very hard on FreeBSD 5.x and 6.x." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- smokeupthenetbsd · 2021-07-15 15:06 > Never refer to any BSD as a "distro". There is no such thing I will be sure to get in my time machine and tell the original contributors to the Berkeley Software *Distribution* that their work (and its modern-day continuations) is absolutely *not* a distribution, despite that being the very name of it. No - this is just a language game people play to try and set themselves up as a superior to the Linux community, and not only is it objectively absurd to deny what BSD stands for, but it's just childish point-scoring. To OP: FreeBSD is quite obsessed with eliminating GPL software from its base, and has advanced quite far along that path. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- reddit_original · 2021-07-15 16:02 >despite that being the very name of it. It also shows how some are totally oblivious to the history and think that "distro" in Linux means the same thing as the word "distribution" when applied in the sense of the word as used in the early 1990s before Linux ever came about. But this is typical of Linux people. Only Linux people, and noobs, think a software distribution of ATTs Unix to Berkley--which was a complete operating system similar to what it is today--is the same thing as the thousands of cobbled together Linux pieces without noticing there are not thousands of cobbled together BSD systems because that's impossible! It's already a complete system! But that's another feather in the BSD hat to point out the superiority over Linux and their people and other hobbyists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kernigh · 2021-07-18 22:03 OpenBSD includes GNU GPL code like gdb, ld.bfd, mkhybrid, objdump. (Those are in the base system, excluding add-on packages like Emacs.) I suspect that FreeBSD has less GNU GPL code. OpenBSD also includes llvm under the Apache license, which is neither the GNU GPL nor a BSD license. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- one_is_the_loneliest · 2021-07-20 01:12 I think OpenBSD is even more obsessed with avoiding the GPL of OP really cares. Both are great in terms of license though. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- laffer1 · 2021-09-25 00:34 It’s my project so let me clarify. Depending on your perspective, it’s both. It started as a hard fork of FreeBSD 6.1 beta but due to limited manpower, we have merged several newer FreeBSD releases in and customized as needed. So if you were to download 2.1 today, it is very similar to FreeBSD 11.4 but when many differences in configuration, userland and so on.