# [PHORONIX] Sony's PlayStation 4 Is Running Modified FreeBSD 9



## pkubaj (Jun 23, 2013)

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTM5NDI

Interesting, but IMO here's where GPL shows its strengths - if FreeBSD were GPL-licensed, AMD would have to release code for its drivers. Now, I guess we can count on someone hack PS4 and extract those drivers, but it's not going to be legal.


----------



## Savagedlight (Jun 23, 2013)

pkubaj said:
			
		

> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTM5NDI
> 
> Interesting, but IMO here's where GPL shows its strengths - if FreeBSD were GPL-licensed, AMD would have to release code for its drivers. Now, I guess we can count on someone hack PS4 and extract those drivers, but it's not going to be legal.



If FreeBSD were GPL licensed, they wouldn't have used FreeBSD. Let's face it; this is probably the main reason they didn't go with Linux in the first place.

I'm glad they're using a FreeBSD fork though. These things tend to have nice things trickle back in the long run, if for no other reason than to make it easier for them to get the newest and shiniest from upstream.


----------



## zspider (Jun 24, 2013)

There seems to be some idea over there, that the GPL magically stops people from taking the code and not giving back, in reality there's really nothing to stop them from doing so if they throw it into a closed source project. BSD wisely realizes this and does not attempt to impose those kind of restrictions.

There also seems to be a lot of envy simmering over there about Sony choosing FreeBSD.


----------



## ShelLuser (Jun 24, 2013)

pkubaj said:
			
		

> if FreeBSD were GPL-licensed, AMD would have to release code for its drivers.


Actually that's not correct. Because only if you fork an existing project which is licensed under the GPL will you be forced into licensing your work under the GPL too (I never understood how this was supposed to be a sign of freedom).

But that doesn't apply if you're programming a separate extension for an environment which just happens to be licensed under the GPL. Because your project is not a fork, you're most certainly not forced into distributing the main program with your extension, and so I can easily come up with closed-source extensions for GPL licensed code.

I think you're confused about the stuff which goes into the Linux kernel. But that's a totally different ballgame which has nothing to do with GPL restrictions. It's not the GPL which prevents people from distributing closed source kernel modules, it's their desire to have their module distributed ("embedded") together with the kernel. Eventually it's Linus' choice to determine what does and doesn't get included. And if you send him a binary kernel module then I have a good hunch what the verdict is going to be.


----------



## throAU (Jun 24, 2013)

pkubaj said:
			
		

> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTM5NDI
> 
> Interesting, but IMO here's where GPL shows its strengths - if FreeBSD were GPL-licensed, AMD would have to release code for its drivers. Now, I guess we can count on someone hack PS4 and extract those drivers, but it's not going to be legal.



Commercial vendors being able to use FreeBSD and NOT have to release all their code is a FEATURE (i.e., not a weakness).

Not a bug.


----------



## kpa (Jun 24, 2013)

Correct. The choice to allow binary only releases of BSD licenced code like in this case is a completely intended one. BSD license does not try to put unnecessary restraints on code that has little value outside the system it's intended for, for example a firmware for a device like a cable box with DVR capabilities, what good is the firmware without the device itself? Why would an average user be interested in the source code of the firmware?


----------



## alie (Jun 24, 2013)

Sony is not giving back to FreeBSD like Yahoo! Really sad there is no take and give.


----------



## throAU (Jun 24, 2013)

```
[jrose@proxy /usr/src/sys/contrib/altq/altq]$ less altq.h
/*      $FreeBSD$       */
/*      $KAME: altq.h,v 1.10 2003/07/10 12:07:47 kjc Exp $      */

/*
 * Copyright (C) 1998-2003
 *      [B]Sony Computer Science Laboratories Inc.[/B]  All rights reserved.
 *
```


etc.


----------



## Crivens (Jun 24, 2013)

Sounds interesting - I will head over there in the lunch break to have a peek at the comments.


----------



## pkubaj (Jun 24, 2013)

I know _the_ BSD license is used because of its advantages, but no one will say that it doesn't have disadvantages, just like GPL has pros and cons as well.


----------



## cpm@ (Jun 24, 2013)

On the freebsd-doc mailing list this is also discussed: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/2013-June/022198.html. I prefer don't use as a information source the provided by Phoronix, for this reason.

Also a quite interesting interview: PS4 to aim the "game environment without walls".


----------



## overmind (Jun 24, 2013)

http://games.slashdot.org/story/13/06/24/000250/playstation-4-will-be-running-modified-freebsd

Same news on Slashdot.


----------



## Crivens (Jun 24, 2013)

Just read some comments there - I think some of the zealots are offline due to a stroke. Normals trolls are immune to this, so they are still there.

Basically the tradeoff is clear and argued all over again and again. Force the sharing ./. share by gift (as if you could sue someone for violating the GPL and then show up in court with reassemblies of encrypted binaries you somehow picked out of a secured, closed system like some game console... not gonna happen).

What I find quite disturbing is the tendency to deny developers to choose what licence they want. WTF? Can someone please grow up? When I put code under the BSD licence, it's my choice to do so.

The PS4 is said to be pretty different from off-the-shelf HW, so I see no point in Sony not giving anything back. On the contrary - doing so would make sense. You need not keep it up to date on your own that much. And when finally someone else may find an architecture sufficiently close to the PS4 on the shelf, well, I think the PS4 will be considered gone by then. So no loss there. Only more developers who already know the ropes and can make things for the then-hot PS6.

Some of the posters there seem frustrated that they don't get asked to nitpick on the brushwork on the bikeshed. Not that they would have any choice in the paining, or the color, or the whole blooming shed.


----------



## NewGuy (Jun 24, 2013)

Wasn't the PS3 also based on a branch of FreeBSD? I seem to recall rumours to that effect when the previous generation of consoles came out. As such it makes sense for the PS4 to use FreeBSD as well. And it looks as though Sony will be contributing patches back, so everyone wins.


----------



## TiberiusDuval (Jun 24, 2013)

_I d_on't know for sure, but at least it used _the UFS_ filesystem.


----------



## CoTones (Jun 24, 2013)

The FreeBSD is _a_ true server OS and not suited for games. Sony is totally crazy for doing that. </irony>


----------



## ahavatar (Jun 24, 2013)

When are we going to be able to run _an_ AMD 7000 series graphics card on FreeBSD_?_ I hope AMD will release its FreeBSD driver.


----------



## Savagedlight (Jun 24, 2013)

From what a game developer friend told me, the "driver" is probably a programming API specifically for this chip, and wouldn't make much sense outside of that context. It wouldn't be an X.Org driver.


----------



## DutchDaemon (Jun 24, 2013)

A forum user alerted me to the fact that there's a user 'DutchDaemon' showing up in the PS4/FreeBSD topic on the forums at Phoronix. I'd like to have it on the record that that is not me. I don't use the name 'DutchDaemon' anywhere else, ever.


----------



## cpm@ (Jun 25, 2013)

DutchDaemon said:
			
		

> A forum user alerted me to the fact that there's a user 'DutchDaemon' showing up in the PS4/FreeBSD topic on the forums at Phoronix. I'd like to have it on the record that that is not me. I don't use the name 'DutchDaemon' anywhere else, ever.



He is the Linux (GPL) @DutchDaemon's version :e


----------



## mlsemon (Jun 25, 2013)

All I see are a couple of pictures.  It starts with GRUB in one picture, which could suggest that it's Debian kFreeBSD, or maybe GRUB2 loading regular FreeBSD.  Then in the next picture, someone's loading libstdc++, suggesting that Sony isn't totally against the GPL, and even then the license version hasn't been established yet.

So basically, the idea that it's based on "modified FreeBSD 9.0" comes from one sentence on a site I've never visited.  Might one of the experts here correct me?  I've seen only enough kFreeBSD to run back to the real FreeBSD rather quickly, not much longer than that.  Thanks!


----------



## zspider (Jun 25, 2013)

DutchDaemon said:
			
		

> A forum user alerted me to the fact that there's a user 'DutchDaemon' showing up in the PS4/FreeBSD topic on the forums at Phoronix. I'd like to have it on the record that that is not me. I don't use the name 'DutchDaemon' anywhere else, ever.



I saw that too, I was like "that's not the real @DutchDaemon. <_<"


----------



## Blueprint (Jun 25, 2013)

I knew it was not the real Dutch when he used two consecutive exclamation marks. That is not grammatically correct!


----------



## Crivens (Jun 25, 2013)

What brought a smile to my face is that the first rant post I saw from the evil twin has the obligatory "_Last edited by DutchDaemon; 06-25-2013 at 12:38 AM._" footer.

Seriously, some people who post there should seek help.


----------



## kpedersen (Jun 25, 2013)

That is quite cool that people relate the name @DutchDaemon so closely with any news regarding FreeBSD. Perhaps we should replace Beastie with @DutchDaemon


----------



## DutchDaemon (Jun 25, 2013)

I am copyrighted.


----------



## Crivens (Jun 25, 2013)

kpedersen said:
			
		

> Perhaps we should replace Beastie with @DutchDaemon


He already has his monument in the system binaries  If that is not enough, we may vote to dedicate one release to him.



			
				DutchDaemon said:
			
		

> I am copyrighted.


What licence?


----------



## DutchDaemon (Jun 25, 2013)

Liquor License.


----------



## ManaHime (Jun 26, 2013)

If this news is true this is really interesting. It's just sad it doesn't mean I can't turn my computer into a PS4 and play all the latest shiny games directly on FreeBSD!


----------



## overmind (Jun 27, 2013)

D4rkSilver said:
			
		

> If this news is true this is really interesting. It's just sad it doesn't mean I can't turn my computer into a PS4 and play all the latest shiny games directly on FreeBSD!



... or that you can use a PS4 as a server/desktop by installing FreeBSD on it.


----------



## throAU (Jun 27, 2013)

D4rkSilver said:
			
		

> If this news is true this is really interesting. It's just sad it doesn't mean I can't turn my computer into a PS4 and play all the latest shiny games directly on FreeBSD!



This will never happen in a supported manner and will never be endorsed by any console vendor.

The entire point of consoles is that they can closely control the hardware the games run on so that there's a specific platform to target, which ensures the game developer can optimize appropriately, have one set of hardware to debug on, etc.


----------



## achix (Jul 3, 2013)

Oh wait, wasn't Sony supposed to be dead*?* Or hasn't Netcraft confirmed so?


----------



## PugTsurani (Jul 3, 2013)

Tivoization anyone?

Rather than have Sony give back code or software, why don't they give back a portion of their profits to the FreeBSD Foundation? After all, they need continued improvements in the base OS. That is if they are running FreeBSD under the hood. As someone stated earlier, it's just some pictures with some lines of text.


----------



## kpa (Jul 3, 2013)

I don't think the TiVo example applies to this case in any way. The license actively encourages what Sony is doing with PS4 and there are no grounds to claim that Sony is "stealing" anything or exploiting a weakness in the license. Also I don't understand how the closed source nature of PD4 actually limit's anyone's freedom (that was the major point in the TiVo vs. GPL debate and IMO it's total horseshit). You may have a freedom of speech and freedom of choise but that doesn't mean you have a right to put your nose into something that isn't your business and claim that it has to be opened up for everyone to see if it's something that does not meet your moral standards.


----------



## PugTsurani (Jul 3, 2013)

I think it does apply in that Sony does not want Tivoization to happen to them, not that Tivoization will happen to the PS4. As with any large corporation, there were meetings and research before deciding what OS to use, the license of that OS, and the license they will use for their hardware and software. I believe Tivo was mentioned during one of those meetings and played a part in the decision making process. What company wants to be the next Stallman example and the basis for the GPL v4?


----------



## Savagedlight (Jul 3, 2013)

Now I'm really curious who anonymously donated $250,000+ last year. Oh well, we'll never know.


----------



## achix (Jul 4, 2013)

^^^ right, lots of _people_ noticed that.


----------

