Seems a good sound library. Was made for midi support

Idk what about sound in netbsd

I need look about. I want a portable unix-like sound library

But now i'm busy reading this book

Nice book

It shows all rhings

All things I must learn as a unix user

Jordan Roy: Hi

Jordan Roy: I hate systemd with all my heart

<b>Jordan Roy:</b> I'm tempted to try trueos

Jordan Roy: I use lxqt, with bpswm

Jordan Roy: How do i know if i will be able to still those and other Linux software on my bsd machine?

the only linux software you've mentioned so far is systemd

There is too much hate around systemd

Meh, systemd's lead dev doesn't even understand how rm works, or see the value in filing CVEs, the hate's well deserved.

Jordan Roy: Newnix (Telegram): you mean that there are bsd builds of the softwares i mentioned?

Jordan Roy: Poettering is a fucking asshole

Jordan Roy: Unix design philosophy is what made its success. This pile of convergent monolithic shit that is systemd is going to hurt Linux a lot.

<b>Jordan Roy:</b> By "it's success" i mean Unix's success

LXQT and BSPWM should both work fine on BSD

Never looked into lkqt though because I don't use a DE

Jordan Roy: Newnix (Telegram): do you use a WM?

Yeah, I use dwm from suckless on my machines

<b>Jordan Roy:</b> I love dwm, that's what i used before. Is the session setup hard to do when starting X for a user? I mean dbus, automounting for removable media, etc

Jordan Roy: All those annoying things

I don't use dbus on most of my systems, and manually mount things outside of /etc/fstab, but you'd just need to create a devfs rule if you need automounting

I like simplicity in my setups

The devil himself

We have luck it's set with nologin

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): Also, the majority of the OSX kernel and userland are open source, and freely available on their website. This excludes a few of the previously mentioned drivers, and I think the CPU drivers are being pulled in the newer versions also. Not that anyone cares about those anyway.

seriously?

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): Aye, I know all about blackbox testing. Comes from the electrical side of things.

And that's false

Before we talk about something we must be sure that we know what we are talking about and we really know before talking..

I am not making myslef in a superior position, but let me tell you that this is my work field

Microsoft and Apple are closed source, also Cisco and some comercial companies

they do make some codes available

but they never release the code of their hugest projects

though

secure code is very necessary nowdays

If you write codes to make your programs functional only

then u are away from coding world..

That's why I always say we must know the mechanism and the function of things to make em better

the more we understand the more we improve what we do and make it better

good night

Jaypatelani: Jordan Roy: check cwm on OpenBSD if you are using OpenBSD and Lumina-Desktops is good DE

Jordan Roy: Jaypatelani: ty

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): Yes, blackbox testing comes from the circuits world. You learn about it in your electronics class way before they cover it in your computer programming classes. It's kinda a standard thing over here. I know about it from both sides of the fence.

aaron: Sneaky Head (Telegram): (They even cover it in mechanical classes these days...)

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): And honestly, if you care about your CPU driver or power drivers, you already know enough to simply reverse them. They're pretty trivial and boring. Anything interesting is in the documentation anyway, and none of that makes it into the source code, open or closed. And graphics drivers are another beast. The code doesn't matter at all for those, it's just a bloody mess. You won't learn anything from it anyway, be it bytecode or C++. You would rather have the full chipset and board documentation and not bother with that garbage heap.

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): Apple makes about 80-90% of their source for the kernel and operating system available. They don't release the source for the majority of their graphical applications though. I come from the systems/kernel side of things, I don't care about the source for those. The most important source for their kernel is open, and that's going to be the base of all their security, not some bug in their word processor.

aaron: Sneaky Head (Telegram): Chess.app and TextEdit.app are open source though, if you really want to look. I think you'll find something like WebKit or clang/llvm more interesting though...

VVelox: hmmm... Lumina-desktop looks interesting

VVelox: I use a mixture of Fluxbox and XFCE here.

VVelox: actually using the XFCE desktop with Fluxbox

Lumina's nice, pretty similar to LXQt

Lumina's nice, pretty similar to LXQt

Yes but I prefer LXQt

I recommend use a simple wm

Just try i3wm cwm dwm...

I use cmw since jay said to me to use it

Ver "CWM Window Manager" en YouTube https://youtu.be/8mByi6ztyWE

* VVelox chuckles and smiles to VMS (Telegram), before shi suggests "twm?"

No

Twm sucks

VVelox: Twm is not to bad

VVelox: nicer than KDE

I wanted modify a little twm to make it usable for me. But discovered cwm so no need to do that

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): And honestly, if you care about your CPU driver or power drivers, you already know enough to simply reverse them. They're pretty trivial and boring. Anything interesting is in the documentation anyway, and none of that makes it into the source code, open or closed. And graphics drivers are another beast. The code doesn't matter at all for those, it's just a bloody mess. You won't learn anything from it anyway, be it bytecode or C++. You would rather have the full chipset and board documentation and not bother with that garbage heap.

reverse engineering sir is based on the architecture of the device and its hardware and that's clear, if you talk about reversing simple apps without dealing with hardware such as memory and CPU, this a very basic thing...

And if you wanna talk about reverse, action is louder than talking, there are a lenty challenges over there and I have a CTF team, if you want to show your skills you're welcome

http://www.rankk.org/ https://www.wechall.net/

When we talk about smething we must know how to do it, show me what you can do

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): I think we're talking about different things then. You're talking about CPU architecture and memory layout. In the case of OSX, it's x86_64 Intel. You already know that from the sticker on the box... Unless you care about register allocation or something, that's not a layer of code you will learn anything from, and again, bytecode or ASM, there will be no difference.

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): I'm not in the security field though. I would rather write software than deal with reading driver code (although that's all I end up reading anyway...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_engineering

commrtcial softwares are not open source, and reverse engineering is not only for this purpose, we find a lot of things with

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): Commercial software and open source have nothing to do with each other. Red Hat sells commercial open source Linux distributions.

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): So what segment of OSX would you like to see open that's not open already? Feel free to point me to a source file in your favorite BSD.

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): Commercial software and open source have nothing to do with each other. Red Hat sells commercial open source Linux distributions.

really? give me the source code iTunes? or some payed softwares such as iOS firmware, Adobe payed products etc (the source code)... gimme the source code of Oracle payed programs, and Cisco, Fortinet, F5, gimme the code of OSX

do u take drugs?

gimme the code of Windows and their commercial (none free) sorftawres

am waiting

Kasperky?

find me how the Playstation firmware works and let us modify it and make it read games and make installable for free

come on I wanna be a millionaire

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): I am going to assume English is not your first language, but even so, insults are not required.

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): I am going to assume English is not your first language, but even so, insults are not required.

Where is the insult?

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): Red Hat sells a commercial Linux distribution. That is a fact. It is open source. That is also a fact.

<b>aaron:</b> Sneaky Head (Telegram): Red Hat sells a commercial Linux distribution. That is a fact. It is open source. That is also a fact.

it based on open source kernel but their included programs (most of em are not free)

and we're not talking about redhat

we are talking about open and closed source of commercial purposes

<b>aaron:</b> All their included programs are free and the source is freely available.

Well

So why do wee need redhat?

aaron: We don't?

let us build our redhat like OS