LibertyBSD - OpenBSD minus the blobs
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios
Read the full story here
https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2014-December/002659.html
It seems that the linked to archive has scrubbed the text from the original email. A more easily readable version can be found here: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2014-12/msg00002.html
Oh, and also, a request for anyone interested: Even if you can't donate, please help a submission about LibertyBSD be accepted on Slashdot - http://slashdot.org/submission/4088331/openbsd-forked-to-remove-non-free-firmware
Here is a direct link: http://libertybsd.net/
Apparently, the developers won't release anything until 3 BTC have been donated. Smells a bit fishy if you ask me...
I'd be actually happy about this fundraising thing as long as the code *does* get released in the end.
If people succeed to make money with free software the whole movement will sure benefit a lot.
Definitely fishy.
I've been curious about BSD myself, and just a couple weeks ago thought something akin to "If only there was a BSD variant that respected freedom and wouldn't recommend proprietary software"- well, now there is, I hope.
The fact that they are demanding three BitCoins is rather fishy- I'm suspicious that LibertyBSD exists at all
Seems a bit fishy, you can try kNuBSD on Parabola GNU/Linux-libre for free.
https://wiki.parabola.nu/Parabola_GNU/kNuBSD-fire
I am a member!
This operating system is a scam. There's no knowing if it exists in the first place. No one in their right mind would cough up 3 BTC for software they can't even demo.
Wait for and contribute to NuBSD. They're forking FreeBSD, and they actually care about community. This guy is clearly in it purely for the money, likely hasn't done any work except that awful website, and even if there is software, the project will likely be abandoned.
I am the developer, and I can prove that this is not a scam. You can download the cd56.iso (without source) at http://www.libertybsd.net/cd56.iso
It doesn't contain the sets, so you won't be able to actually install a working system with it, but it does contain the installation scripts. Check /etc/firmware and you will see that no non-free firmware has been included.
Now that I've proven that I actually do have the system, can I ask that you please support it? Compared to other projects such as the Librem Laptop [1], which will be released once $250,000 has been raised, I think a price of 3BTC is quite reasonable.
Also, if you make a donation, I might be willing to send a CD to your house, or let you download a pre-release version. Contact me for details: name at domain
Why not simply sell the CDs...?
Why fork OpenBSD, recreating the efforts of the NuBSD project?
You can buy a CD if you want. OpenBSD charges 35 British Pounds for their CD set [1]. I'd be willing to charge half of that. It comes out to around 0.085BTC. I'll also include postage in that cost. Tell me if you're interested.
As for the NuBSD project, I hadn't heard of it until after I made my announcement. Also, while they plan to deblob OpenBSD in the future, it seems that they're still working on deblobbing FreeBSD at the moment.
name at domain wrote:
> Why not simply sell the CDs...?
Because selling copies of OpenBSD would mean distributing copies of
nonfree software and distributing copies of installers that install
nonfree software by default. LibertyBSD's author says OpenBSD does both
of these things, pointing to
http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/distrib/miniroot/install.sub.diff?r1=1.653&r2=1.654&f=h
and
http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/distrib/miniroot/install.sub.diff?r1=1.653&r2=1.654&f=h
respectively.
At the same time, distributing a nonfree copy of an OS (regardless of
price), namely inviting users to "download the cd56.iso (without
source)" -- doesn't strike me as a way to provide users with a way to be
"sure that there are no non-free blobs lurking in the depths of your
system" (quoting the language on http://libertybsd.net/).
I'll release the source code to cd56.iso once I have reached the fundraising goal. I was uncomfortable about releasing the binary without source, but it seemed like it was the only way to prove that I wasn't a fraud.
I meant selling CDs of LibertyBSD. I was *NOT* talking about selling CDs of OpenBSD.
And yea, I'm interested in purchasing a LibertyBSD CD. :)
That's great. Send me an email with your shipping address, and we'll proceed from there.
Oh, and just one request - would you mind not distributing the software until the fundraiser is over (or two months after the purchase date, if the fundraiser is unsuccessful)? I can't (and wouldn't want to) force you to do this, but it would really help me if you did.
I shot you an email with the information you asked for.
I am a member!
Yeah, can't help but find it fishy as well. Generally you'd want to have a project going before asking for donations. The only time one might be able to get away with getting money up front is by being well known in the community. I'll wait on this one.
Is there anything else that I can do to convince you that LibertyBSD actually exists?
Maybe release the source code? What you're trying to do is nice, but it does seem strange to me. If you're trying to make a fully free system, it would be logical for you to develop and share it as free software. But you say that you only provide a non-functional binary .iso without the source code and sell a DVD with working one you ask people not to share and distribute. You may have a vision of your final product being free software, but so far, what you do seems to go against the four freedoms, rather than support them. If I got my facts wrong, please correct me. If not, then yes, I am suspicious of you and LibertyBSD.
As much as I would love to release the source code early, if I did, there would be nothing to sell! Also, it wouldn't add much additional proof of the software's existence.
The FSF supports selling free software - the GPL was designed with this in mind: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
It's a lot like crowdfunding - except when you use Kickstarter, there's always the chance that the project might fail. With LibertyBSD, you can be certain that the product you are paying for actually exists.
Read the article correctly
The article says selling free software
and The free software must possess the four freedoms
You violated the four freedoms
you say that you only provide a non-functional binary .iso without the source code and
sell a DVD with working one you ask people not to share and distribute.
the software until the fundraiser is over (or two months after the purchase date, if the fundraiser
is unsuccessful)
The people who receive the software have the freedom to distribute it. All I am doing, is requesting on a human level that they wait a bit before doing so. They can disregard my request if they want to.
I didn't want to distribute the cd56.iso without source, but many people were suspicious that LibertyBSD did not actually exist. I had to provide some form of proof.
Well, I can't really tell you what to do but I would like to advise you to switch to releasing the code now and enabling donations without deadlines. By doing so you would reveive much more donations as you can see with Trisquel. People keep donating money even though the software already is freely available and they do so because they want to see the development continue. Wouldn't that be an option for you? I really doubt that you will ever receive any Bitcoins going the way you are going now.
Mzee, you're right! I never realised how much people donated to Trisquel. Let me get the system into a usable state (due to some of the modifications requested), and I'll release it soon, gratis. Although I still intend to meet the GNU FSDG, some parts of the specification might not be met.
The Trisquel project has...
$ $ wget -qO - https://trisquel.info/en/about?page=0 https://trisquel.info/en/about?page=1 https://trisquel.info/en/about?page=2 | sed -n '/Associate Members/,/Registered Users/p' | grep -c 'tr class'
135
... 135 members (donating every month) and has received those direct donations (since it became an option in 2010 or so):
$ wget https://trisquel.info/en/donate -qO - | tr '<' '\n' | awk '/td>donated/ { donations[$2] += $3 } END { for (currency in donations) print currency, donations[currency] }'
SEK 290
CAD 331
€ 3199.51
NZD 50
MXN 1324
CZK 250
BRL 25
PLN 170
SGD 15
DKK 50
CHF 340
£ 374
AUD 155
$ 9073.93
NOK 100
Wow, that's amazing.
I am a translator!
i wrote a song abou your os. It's titled "Smells like fish spirit"
SuperTramp83 said:
i wrote a song about your os. It's titled "Smells like fish spirit"
Me too, but in this case is related about your smart comment:
"Smells like you did not bathe your asser"
Don't mess with my "NIRVANA" BIATCH!
It's hard to do business with unknown people. That's the case here from possible donnors/patrons to Riley and vice-versa. It's much easier if there's a trusted intermediary.
Riley Baird:
I'm very glad that you're interested in free software. I support commercial development of free software. However, I think that you're misguided in the way you're raising funds for your work. The main problem with publishing a binary-only ISO image is that it doesn't respect the user's rights (The 4 freedoms), in other words, it's proprietary software. Additionally, from what I understand, users can't verify that the system you offer works as intended from the binary ISO image, since it doesn't includes source code or can be installed, it's incomplete, and hence can't be checked. With Linux-libre you can see the scripts that have been used to deblob and check whether any blob remains, which isn't possible with the published LibertyBSD image from what I understand.
I would be glad to see that you succeed in commercially contributing to free software, without distributing proprietary software. I propose a means that I think you can use to raise funds for your work more effectively, and reduce the uncertainty that some people interested in LibertyBSD may have of being scammed:
Stop distributing the binary ISO image.
Further donations would be made to a Bitcoin address overseen by an escrow composed by members that you and the free software community generally trusts[1] while the following process is undergoing:
Make a written specification in which you describe at depth what you offer. Here's an incomplete list of questions that the specification should answer, in my opinion:
Does LibertyBSD meets the GNU FSDG to the best of your knowledge? If not, on which point is it not compliant?. Bear in mind that there may be recommendations of proprietary software scattered in free programs, did you made an effort to remove them?.
what system it's based on (OpenBSD version, patches applied, and additional software included, if any)?
What is the difference of features? I see that you already mentioned that it works only on x86-64 in the project page, but an complete list is better.
What's the software that was included/removed/modified? For modified software, how many lines were modified[2]? Are all of those changes of your authorship?. Under which license are they released?. This is very important, as it gives interested parties an idea of how much work was done.
Was the system rebranded? If so, which packages have been modified for rebranding?, and also include a sample of the artwork.
In my proposal, you would make such a specification and publish it for a public comments period in which people may ask whether LibertyBSD does something that you haven't specified, or suggest clarifications of your specification; you would then modify the specification at your sole discretion given this feedback (or chose to ignore all feedback). The point with this is that you have an opportunity to clarify doubts and arrive at a specification satisfactory to you and the possible donnors or patrons.
After the comments period, if enough money was sent to the escrow address, you would send the final version of the specification (which would be public) and the complete LibertyBSD (As would be published) to an escrow. If not enough money has been sent, then you have the option to wait until all the money you originally asked for is raised before submitting LibertyBSD to the escrow, or send it anyway to the escrow
At your option, you can publish and timestamp a cryptographic hash of the submission *before* sending it to the escrow. This make is less likely that the escrow will cheat, since you can prove that you had the submission before they did. They can't rebrand LibertyBSD and successfully claim that developed it, for instance.
After receiving LibertyBSD, the escrow evaluates whether it meets the specification, and if so, releases the money to you, otherwise, if it contains minor problems you'd have a period of time known in advance to fix them (14 days for example). In case you failed to meet the specifications within the allowance period, the escrow returns the money to donors, or sends it to another end, chosen in advance (for instance, the Free Software Foundation).
Of course, the escrow must be a non-empty set of people who free software supporters generally trust, you trust, would be willing to offer his work as escrow and know enough about OpenBSD to perform this evaluation.
The Bitcoin pay-to-script can be used to make sure that a minority of the members of the escrow can't cripple the process by requiring the signature of more than half the escrow members to act on the money. I think that it may be possible to additionally make the Bitcoin address correspond to an script that allows the received money to be released only to you or the FSF (for example), but not to any other Bitcoin address.
Doing the fundraising this way gives more confidence to the interested parties while making it less likely that either you or the escrows will defraud, while it avoid the problem of publishing a proprietary version of your work that doesn't accomplishes the goal of proving that the system works as intended.
This proposal is incomplete, some points require opinions and further thought, and must be made clear before the process begins. An incomplete list is: Which people would act as the escrow? I ask the community to state their opinion, and to offer to volunteer as members of the escrow, especially to those who have contributed to free software already. What would be the public comments period and the allowance period? I suggest 30 days for the former and 14 for the later, but I suggest to start the fundraising on 2015, since the FSF is currently running an fundraising campaing and some people who want to donate to free software may split the amount between to only one of LibertyBSD or the FSF (possibly giving zero to either, which is less efficient for both projects). What would happen to the funds if you fail to meet the specificaion in time? I suggest that in such a case, the funds should be donated to the FSF, since that way the effort of collecting funds isn't wasted. What would be the exact Bitcoin script?. I don't have much experience with this, so I can't give a suggestion on the details of it.
All of this must be agreed in advance. Riley: If you agree to this proposal please state the specific terms on which you agree to it. I recommend waiting until some interested members give their feedback before you deceide on which specific terms to accept the proposal.
Thanks to Jason Self (jxself) for his feedback on this proposal. I made some modifications accordingly before posting.
[1]: I said “generally trust” rather than “trust” because given that the set of free software supporters is large and uncentralized, it's not possible to say something for sure about them regarding whom they trust, so I don't want to imply otherwise.
[2]: Not counting aesthetic changes such as formatting, and provided that they're coded as common practice. You should state in your specifications that the changes follow “common practice” in the sense that you didn't split what normally would be a single line of code in as as many as possible (one per character) or similar to artificially increase the modified/added line count.
Change log: Re-joined an accidentally split paragraph.
Thank you so much for going to all of this work to make this proposal. This is definitely something which I would like to do.
*I've removed the cd56.iso from the website. If anyone is looking for it, and still wants it, feel free to ask.
*Would the FSF be willing to act as an escrow? I can't think of an organisation more trusted within the free software community.
*As for confirming that no blobs are in the system, a set of scripts is not required because OpenBSD has a strict policy against non-free software [1], making an exception for microcode, which they do not view as software. All of the microcode is stored in src/sys/dev/microcode (or /etc/firmware on the cd56.iso), so it is trivial to confirm that no binary-only firmware has been missed.
*I will be happy to provide a specification answering the questions that you asked, but creating this will take a little time. I'll post when it's done.
*I'm fine with the times that you mentioned - 30 days for the public comment period, and 14 days for the allowance period. The public comment period would start after the release of the draft specification.
*In the case that I do not make the required modifications (if any) within the allowance period, then I would strongly recommend that the money be returned to the donors, instead of to the FSF. This way, it is harder for the FSF (if it is the escrow) to be accused of conspiracy.
*I don't see any harm in continuing to accept donations during the public comments period, even if the escrow service wouldn't start until the end of it (which, coincidentally, would seem to be the end of the FSF's campaign). I might be missing something extremely obvious, though, so tell me if I am. :)
If there is anything else that should be added such that there can be more trust in this transaction, then I will most likely be happy to implement it.
----
[1] http://www.openbsd.org/policy.html
You can't rely entirely on OpenBSD's policy. Note this passage:
> It follows however, that OpenBSD cannot include material
> which includes copyrights which are more restrictive than
> the Berkeley copyright, or must relegate this material to
> a secondary status, i.e. OpenBSD as a whole is freely
> redistributable, but some optional components may not be.
In other words, software which doesn't follow their policy is something they avoid, but not strictly in the case of "optional" components. In fact, any copylefted program goes against this policy, and yet OpenBSD includes some copylefted programs even in its base installation, "[f]or historical reasons". So you can't entirely rely on the OpenBSD team to keep all proprietary software out of the system.
On a side note, I'd be wary of giving support to the OpenBSD team, or any BSD team, simply because of their opposition to copyleft and intention to replace all useful copylefted programs with pushover-licensed programs, to be honest. I feel like giving money to them funds development of software that threatens our bargaining power with proprietary software developers, like LLVM, and in effect hurts our movement more than it helps it. Though to be fair, I also have no interest on a technical level in a BSD system, so I'm not giving money towards this anyway.
Okay, good point about the policy. As far as I can tell, there is no more non-free software in OpenBSD (other than the firmware blobs). If any more is found, I'll be sure to remove it.
I don't think that it's worth refusing to help OpenBSD just because of their license choice. After all - we wouldn't have had ath9k without them, and if that were the case, there'd be no fully free wifi at all.
orthogonal released the cd56.iso- I did a quick comparison of OpenBSD's ISO and LibertyBSD's ISO:
LibertyBSD:
8.0 MB in size
OpenBSD:
8.8 MB in size
That's all the comparison that's possible without the source code.
Something was removed. Perhaps it was the blobs?
It seems most likely that the blobs are the only things which would be large enough to account for this much of a difference in size.
Since you're already buying a CD, I'll email you a link to the source tarballs now, if you'd like to do any more comparison. (They're several hundred megabytes, though.)
I've just heard that some people are unable to donate/buy CDs because they don't have a Bitcoin wallet, so I've included instructions on how to pay using Paypal or credit card:
http://www.libertybsd.net/#nobitcoin
I've also contacted the FSF to ask about escrow, so hopefully that will work. If not, is there any trusted member of the community that would like to volunteer?
I not fsf member but I can volunteer
Thanks, that would be great. I have two questions:
1) Are you generally trusted within the community? Is there anyone who can agree to that?
2) Do you accept credit card or Paypal, and if so, would you be willing to convert the money to BTC before sending it to me?
Thanks for your offer, but it has been pointed out to me by email that you are not (yet) a highly trusted member of the community, so I have made the decision to cancel my offer to make you the escrow. Please don't take this personally; I am sure that with time you will be able to become a highly trusted member of the community, however at present you are not a viable candidate for this role.
I am currently in the process of contacting potential candidates that have been recommended to me.
Thanks again for volunteering.
Riley:
I'm glad that you found my suggestion useful and chose to use it. Thanks as well.
>*I don't see any harm in continuing to accept donations during the public comments period, even if the escrow service wouldn't start until the end of it (which, coincidentally, would seem to be the end of the FSF's campaign). I might be missing something extremely obvious, though, so tell me if I am. :)
I may have not explained myself correctly. In my proposal, the escrow
would begin to receive donations on your behalf when the public comments period begins (Hence that I suggested to wait until the FSF fundraising ends, and that also gives you time to have found people for the escrow). I think that you understood that my proposal was to open the escrow for donations after the public comments period. This would also work, but it doesn't given people who would donate only through a third party the option to donate that way immediately; they'd have to hold the money until the public comments period ends; this is of course, also a matter of judgement and it isn't critical whether to open the escrow for donations when the comments period begins or ends.
Of course, you need not stop accepting donations at any point. You can accept donations directly and through the escrow at the same time, and leave the choice on which way to donate to the donnors' discrection.
I don't know if the FSF would be willing to act as an escrow, but it's fine that you asked. I suggest that you continue seeking people to act as the escrow, for instance, by asking in places where free software supporters tend to meet (Such as here, especially if you start a new thread) or in the mailing lists. I see that you made the announcement in gnu-linux-libre, so mentioning the plan of using an escrow and asking for volunteers that have substantially contributed to free software is a good continuation; you can link to this thread. You can also ask free software supporters directly. Some may recommend you other people to whom you may ask, and so on, recursively. I can think of:
Sylvain Beucler name at domain>, : long-time administrator of GNU Savannh, who has since left that position.
Yoni Rabkin : long-time developer of GNU free software (see his web site), and also volunteers to answer the mails at name at domain.
Rubén, the founder and main developer (I think) of Trisquel. He's usually on #trisquel in irc.freenode.net as “quidam”.
Matt Lee : Campaigns manager of the FSF. “mattl” on Freenode.
Karl Berry : I don't know what he does exactly, but some years ago he was often the one to reply when I wrote to the GNU and FSF contact e-mail addresses and he also participated sometimes in GNU Savannah.
I'm not listing Richard Stallman because he is likely too busy to act as escrow, but you can ask him anyway, or ask him instead for people who may want to act as escrow.
There's a lot of people that you can ask to act as escrow, or you can ask for people who may want to act as escrow. I have to go right now, so I didn't write about more people; I may also have left several writing errors for the same reason. Also try the fully free distribution mailing lists and consider writing to the OpenBSD mailing lists or forums, but expect a mostly negative answer since that people don't tend to care about ethics of software; some may say something productive, however.
I also don't like the philosphy of *BSD people and what they're doing of writing permissive alternatives to copylefted programs, such as GCC, etc... since it wastes an opportunity to push free software for people who may use it on purely practical concerns. However, LibertyBSD doesn't do this as far as I understand, instead it offers to take that existing software and make it possible to use it without use the proprietary software that the OpenBSD people added as well, so I hope it succeds in doing what I think it will do.
Ah, I see what you mean. If that is the case, I may have to start my fundraiser at the same time as the FSF's, as I was selling copies encouraging people to redistribute it two months after receiving it, and with 30 days for the public comments period and 14 days for the allowance period, there may not be enough time.
Thanks for your suggestions on finding an escrow. I'll try to contact the people that you listed, with the exception of the OpenBSD mailing lists. I've mentioned the idea there, and they seem to be quite hostile to it.
I'm composing the specification, and I'd like to seek clarification on something.
Some manual pages contain references to firmware files for use in free drivers. They do not specifically mention that the firmware is non-free, but rather discuss compile/usage options, etc. This information would also be valid for a free version of the firmware, should one be created.
To meet the GNU FSDG, does this information still need to be removed?
> To meet the GNU FSDG, does this information still need to be removed?
yes
Okay, thanks. It's annoying, but still do-able.
I've made a specification for LibertyBSD. You can see it here: http://libertybsd.net/specification.html
As of now, the public comments period is starting. Email me any questions and you may have about the specification, and I'll put them, along with the answers, on the web page. (Alternatively, you can just ask on this thread.)
I think a free version of OpenBSD would be a good idea. I like some of
the aspects of the project, especially regarding security, although not
the aversion towards copyleft.
You might want to check out the Trisquel issue tracker for examples of
GNU FSDG issues that the project faces:
https://trisquel.info/en/project/issues?text=GFSD&projects=&status=All&priorities=All&categories=All
Some slightly more difficult FSDG issues that Trisquel faces include
rebranding programs such as Firefox and Thunderbird (see the Trademarks
section of the guidelines) and changing documentation to meet the
guidelines. Note that OpenBSD provides Firefox and Thunderbird packages:
http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/pub/OpenBSD/5.6/packages/amd64/
Regarding escrow I think you'll need a more specific set of conditions
for the release of funds (e.g. the scope of the project), where the
money will go if the project fails, project timeline, etc. I think
contacting the FSF for escrow is a good idea.
I hope that helps and best of luck with your project.
Andrew
> Regarding escrow I think you'll need a more specific set of
> conditions for the release of funds (e.g. the scope of the project),
> where the money will go if the project fails, project timeline, etc.
> I think contacting the FSF for escrow is a good idea.
Oops, I didn't read your specification until I posted, so you can
probably disregard most of this.
Andrew
Thanks for the advice. I won't have to worry about rebranding Firefox and Thunderbird yet, since this release doesn't contain a libre ports tree.
As for the escrow, I've contacted the FSF, and they aren't willing to assist in this regard. However, alimiracle has expressed interest. Do you know whether or not he would be trusted by the free software community?
from specification
"""
• Any changes which I would have copyright over, I release into the public domain.
"""
public domain Not enough
You should release the changes Under gnu licenses
BTW, What about Firefox
alimiracle: Although I'm generally in favour of strong copyleft, I don't think that's appropriate in this case, for tactical reasons.
It would be good to show that FSF supporters can in fact recommend an OS that is not GNU and not GPL but still 100% free software.
Another thing is that one would want to encourage the OpenBSD project to be inspired by LibertyBSD to make the upstream distribution more free, which in turn would make LibertyBSD easier to maintain. Applying a non-permissive license like the GPL would make this very unlikely to happen.
if You do not release the changes Under gnu licenses
No one from the free software will love help you
We have gnu/linux
It is unreasonable to help develop something that does not fit gnu philosophy
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios