2026-09-29 02:31 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@netbsd@mastodon.sdf.org 2026-10-06 09:55
@river@lingo.lol @yojimbo@masto.hackers.town @chadmccullough@mastodon.bsd.cafe @elementary@mastodon.social The BSD license requires attribution to the copyright holder. It's possible some changes wouldn't fall under any reasonable person's understanding of copyright (transformative changes to whitespace, for example).
-
@chadmccullough@mastodon.bsd.cafe 2026-09-29 02:33
@river@lingo.lol 💯 @yojimbo@masto.hackers.town @elementary@mastodon.social
-
@bpl@snac.bsd.cafe 2026-10-06 11:01
OpenBSD's policies¹ don't specifically name LLMs but they have said that they consider it to not have an author who could grant OpenBSD licence to use it² This is a theory, the practice is that OpenBSD accepts LLM-generated code. It is included in tmux, LLVM and Xenocara. CC: @yojimbo@masto.hackers.town @chadmccullough@bsd.cafe @elementary@mastodon.social
-
@bpl@snac.bsd.cafe 2026-10-06 12:16
Xenocara is the X11 "fork" maintained by OpenBSD devs. Its webpage states: Xenocara is the name chosen for the version of X included in OpenBSD. It is currently based on X.Org 7.7 and its dependencies. I understand that they have no capability to maintain their own LLVM version, but it does not change the status quo. It is up to the user if they accept that or not. CC: @river@lingo.lol @yojimbo@masto.hackers.town @chadmccullough@bsd.cafe @elementary@mastodon.social
-
@bpl@snac.bsd.cafe 2026-10-06 12:43
That's why I put word fork in quotation marks. My whole point is that 3rd party software is part of base OS, so if that software gets tainted, OpenBSD too - sometimes "passively" (like for LLVM), sometime "actively" (like for tmux or Xenocara). One person might accept that, another might not. CC: @river@lingo.lol @yojimbo@masto.hackers.town @chadmccullough@bsd.cafe @elementary@mastodon.social