Live data from Hacker News

Why Dell's ThinOS Runs on FreeBSD

freebsdfoundation.org

1–10 of 27 posts

Re: Why Dell's ThinOS Runs on FreeBSD

#3
post #2

It doesn't say in this press release but are WYSE/Dell contributing back to FreeBSD in any way?

It seems like they have some (minor) contributions planned at least based on that article: "Improving FreeBSD’s Linux application binary interface (ABI) will allow a broader base of Linux applications to run seamlessly on ThinOS, enhancing its versatility and appeal."

Re: Why Dell's ThinOS Runs on FreeBSD

#6
post #2

It doesn't say in this press release but are WYSE/Dell contributing back to FreeBSD in any way?

Seems a fair question given this quote:

"FreeBSD’s BSD license offers customization flexibility without the obligation to disclose proprietary enhancements."

But I suppose maybe some of their less sensitive changes, if upstreamed, relieves them of having to own them.

Re: Why Dell's ThinOS Runs on FreeBSD

#7
post #2

It doesn't say in this press release but are WYSE/Dell contributing back to FreeBSD in any way?

Dell (now) owns Isilon (through purchasing EMC), and they do contribute back a lot:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OneFS_distributed_file_system

You can search for "Sponsored by:" in commits for who did work:

* https://www.freshsource.org/commits.php

Re: Why Dell's ThinOS Runs on FreeBSD

#9
post #2

It doesn't say in this press release but are WYSE/Dell contributing back to FreeBSD in any way?

They are donors to the FreeBSD Foundation in addition to committing patches: $ git log | grep -i '@dell.com' | wc -l 86

> grep '@dell.com>'

A better search may be 'Sponsored by:.*[Dell|EMC|Isilon]' or some such.

Some Dell folks may be committers and be pushing things with their @freebsd.org address.

Re: Why Dell's ThinOS Runs on FreeBSD

#10
> Choosing FreeBSD as the base of ThinOS was a strategic decision driven by several key factors:

> License Advantages: FreeBSD’s BSD license offers customization flexibility without the obligation to disclose proprietary enhancements. This aspect is crucial for Dell, allowing the company to tailor the OS to its specific security and performance needs while maintaining proprietary control over its software.

Ok... I see where this is going...

> Engineering Efficiency: Dell’s engineering team benefits from FreeBSD’s stable kernel source code. It simplifies integrating and maintaining customized code, reducing the effort and resources required to keep ThinOS up to date.

Nice one.

> Security Enhancements: The stability of the FreeBSD kernel, coupled with the permissive BSD license, which allows vendors to keep proprietary modifications under wraps, significantly bolsters ThinOS’s security posture and creates a robust platform less susceptible to attacks than a CopyLeft-based system with GPL components.

Are they really defending security through obscurity (closed-source blobs) and at the same time attacking GPL in the same paragraph?

Post reply on HN