zeiz said:
means OpenBSD developers doesn't see a sense to support Linux apps and only put trust in native apps.
Read the goals of the OpenBSD project and things should become more clear to you. OpenBSD is first and foremost ultra secure
and stable network appliance Operating System and then only then the Operating System of general purposes. Running foreign binaries is a great security risk and also can bring any system to its knees. Have you every asked your-self why Microsoft is voiding warranty from the installations containing third party drivers.
zeiz said:
Non free stuff like flash
Despite its reputation many OpenBSD users (myself included) would like to see the native version of flash. The problem is not in OpenBSD developers. The problem is that Flash is a proprietary application currently codded by Adobe. Unless Adobe see financial incentive to release OpenBSD version of flash there is nothing anybody from the OpenBSD camp can do about it.
The same goes for Opera web-browser.
zeiz said:
nvidia/ati-drivers seems doesn't worth for OpenBSD users.
OpenGL and open source ATi drivers work better in Xenocara (OpenBSD version of X window system) than on vanilla X window system or any semi hacked version used on any of Linux distros.
Speaking of NVidia the problem is that NVidia doesn't want to open source any drivers. Binary blob drivers have no value to us as they represent HUGE security risk as well as great source of
instability of an operating system. On the top of it NVidia binary blob drivers would require changes in OpenBSD kernel. That is just unacceptable. Once you use computer which is runs stable and has uptime of couple years you will know what I am talking about.
As a final note OpenBSD supports accelerated frame buffer on quite a few SUN video cards but that information probably means very little to somebody like you who have never used any real
non-Wintel hardware. There is even some effort to support some
proprietary SGI video hardware but again you probably have not even touched SGI computer in your life so you do not know what I am talking about.
zeiz said:
Anyway the layer is just a relief to sweeten FreeBSD desktop.
Linux compatibility layer doesn't exist because of non-existing FreeBSD desktop (even though many people might use FreeBSD on the desktop as well).
It exists so that people can run Oracle database, Maple computer algebra and similar high level proprietary applications.
zeiz said:
Hence why linux_base should be based on testing by nature kernel/base instead of stable one?
Actually Fedora core base used in FreeBSD is very stable and quite outdated. The offical Fedora core used on FreeBSD 7.2 if I recall correctly is Fedora Core 4 or in the best case Fedora Core 8. Fedora Core 4 is equivalent to the RedHat 4 which is almost 4 years old and very, very well-tested and stable.
