OpenBSD Clashes with Adaptec In Quest for Docs 367
TrumpetPower! writes "OpenBSD developers have been asking for documentation from Adaptec for over four months. Adaptec's response has been to deliberately misunderstand what is being asked of them. A former Adaptec employee admits that the hardware is buggy and tricky to get right. So, as a result, OpenBSD 3.7 will ship without Adaptec RAID support. Personally, I'm glad that Theo isn't resting on his laurels."
Why just OpenBSD? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's an old saying (Score:5, Insightful)
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." - Napolean
Why just documentation? (Score:5, Insightful)
They are under an obligation to provide usefulness on legit architectures, but they aren't doing that. Adaptec should get over their shame of bugs, and allow the driver people at OpenBSD a chance at making things work.
There is no general fix for this problem, often specs are released way too late. On the other hand, releasing open source drivers will open specs for the same device. These specs aren't just trade secrets, they're actually necessary for building drivers.
Simple solution... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How many people... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I wonder how this will affect Adaptec? (Score:5, Insightful)
The one advantage it does have is security, which is vital for running large scale servers. These servers have reliabilty as a high priority, so RAID is the norm.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly what obligation does Adaptec have?
Freedom is great! (Score:2, Insightful)
The amazing thing about this whole afair is that Adaptec itself is also a leashed and cuffed company. But after some thinking I realized Nvidia is just such a company. Even if they wanted to release the _specifications_ of their hardware they couldn't.
All in all this forces people to stick to one OS. That's why it is so important people step up for free specifications of their hardware. Because without them you are bound to be tied to a monopolist.
Theo didn't get that FSF award for nothing.
this is a good solution (Score:5, Insightful)
People say that Theo should stop being so annoying, but the only way shareholders find out is when it gets massively publicised like this.
It worked for the 802.11 drivers. It's worth a shot here.
Use IBM RAID (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I wonder how this will affect Adaptec? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd rather use software RAID now. Closed source management tools and unreliable software, hardware and firmware are not things I want anywhere fucking near my data storage subsystems.
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:1, Insightful)
Me (Score:5, Insightful)
I haven't used OpenBSD in a few years and was really impressed with their rewrite of packet filter. You linux folks should check it out.
Re:How many people... (Score:3, Insightful)
Threshold of complexity (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at the small and medium end raid market now. Theres not many players, Adaptec,promise,3ware and a bunch that adaptec bought up. Adaptec gains nothing by opening up itself to a point by point comparison with lesser competitors. Their name recognition is carrying them much the way IBM's used to. Further if the hardware is bugged and tricky and adaptec knew about it then they open themselves up to liability.
Their reasons are obvious keep the barriers high and keept those that can't climb them out.
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nowadays, I purchase equipment based more on its compatibility with FreeBSD (and occasionally OpenBSD) than any other factor (incl. performance and price), as that's what it's going to be used with.
As far as responsibility or obligation is concerned, Adaptec's got none to the Open Source community, unless you can consider it a direct failure of its responsibility to its shareholders. Just because Open Source is "fighting the good fight", doesn't mean anyone owes us anything.
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:1, Insightful)
I like Linux and I think it's very useful but there's just too much self-righteousness in here. Everyone on here expects companies to spend millions in development and bend over backwards for their own purposes. We have to be realistic here and realize that we have to make it worth it for companies like Adaptec to support Linux or in this case, OpenBSD. Adaptec isn't interested in OpenBSD because it's not in their best financial interest, despite their best intentions.
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Tried e-mailing the guy.... (Score:4, Insightful)
You're not wrong. Is it just me, or does this de Raadt character get 'snippy' each and every time the world doesn't roll over and play the game how he wants them to?
An important point in a geek's career is the time when s/he recognises that if s/he's gonna get any further in said career, they're gonna have to maintain a business-benefiting attitude and act in business-benefiting ways else businesses won't employ you any more. Sheer guru-like skill only carries you so far, and then you've gotta play nice with others or others won't play with you anymore.
Some geeks come to that realisation early in their careers. I try to tell my geek.students that before they graduate. Some geeks never ever wake up, and they grow old on low incomes angry at the world.
de Raadt does some wonderful things, sure, but there's always this persistent undertone of a bad attitude waiting to sneak out and throw his weight around. Public nastygrams and "screw you, we'll ship with even less support for your product than we did before" dummy spits constitute "does not play nice with others" in my book.
Trouble is, geeks carry no weight in business, and the businessfolks have all the money. It's up to us to decide if we want some of that money or not.
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:2, Insightful)
Windows does not have 90% of the server market.
No, people expect to be given enough product information to enable them to author device drivers to use the hardware they purchased. Adaptec must have that information to write win32 drivers.
People are offering to do their work for them, likely increasing sales of their products in the process.theo rocks (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh well
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:3, Insightful)
In the markets they choose to cater to. I don't see OpenBSD listed anywhere on their site, so I doubt that OpenBSD users are in their target market. Microsoft only produces Windows for Intel compatible hardware, but I have several Suns. Does Microsoft now have an obligation to me to produce a SPARC version of Windows because apperently not doing so would be 'a foolish move on [Microsoft's] part and stock holders should be pissed at them turning thier backs on millions in sales,' or is it possible that SPARC machines not in Microsoft's target market. I doubt Adaptec's shareholders are loosing sleep over some perturbed OpenBSD users.
Re:Just a note (Score:3, Insightful)
The OpenBSD people won't include something closed in their system, but if you want to close up a copy of OpenBSD and sell it yourself it is fine. You can still use binary drivers and you will be responsible for those drivers, so when someone asks why your Adaptec AAC RAID is broken and doesn't allow for any of the advertised functionality, you will have to explain that you didn't make the driver and that you don't even have the ability to fix it.
OpenBSD doesn't want to lie to people, saying they have support for something when they don't.
This wasn't even about "closing" source to begin with, it has nothing to do with source. It is about the documentation to write a driver for OpenBSD themselves; one they can be responsible for and fix it if there are issues.
Re:Tried e-mailing the guy.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you think the company has the right to refuse to release specs, but we don't have the right to complain or to reverse engineer them, and that they have the right to whine to the gov't if we do so.
Re:Tried e-mailing the guy.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Theo works full-time on the OpenBSD project. He needs to pay the rent / mortgage sure, but he isn't in this for the money.
While he may be 'grating' at times he does stick to his principles (much like RMS).
Man, this is really embarassing for Adaptec (Score:2, Insightful)
I really don't get this... it's win/win for adaptec unless they have something huge to hide. OpenBSD has been around for a while and has a good reputation for getting stuff done. If they would just forward Theo and his buddies to some guy on the back end of things, they'd generate some sales and also make the OpenBSD people shut up for a while.
Wierdest thing is you KNOW the guy they're emailing speaks excellent English because of the typos he makes. He really must be deliberately misunderstanding the request.
Re:Tried e-mailing the guy.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Jeez, he just wants documentation. Why is this such a problem for people to understand? It's not about how much money he could be making if he had a better set of kneepads, or if he let Adaptec shine him on because that's the way "the game" is played. It's about being able to do what he wants with the hardware he (or the other users of OpenBSD) use. It costs nothing or next-to-nothing for Adaptec to provide the same documentation that their own developers use, yet apparently Adaptec doesn't wants to keep this secret because it might be embarrassing.
Perhaps you think it's a good idea to keep this information secret because the embarrassing aspects of the docs might get in the way of some of Adaptec's employees' desire to play the game and exercise their ability to go for "some of that money". Or perhaps not; maybe there's another reason not to allow serious and qualified developers access to existing documentation. Theo just wants to write software that people will use and will use as a reason to purchase more Adaptec products. I'm shocked that you would actually teach students that this is a bad idea.
Then again, having a problem with the way someone conducts themselves is no reason to disregard their innocuous requests. The money is not always right.
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I was Adaptec I'd realize that most people who buy RAID hardware are not planning to run a desktop computer with Windows. They're likely planning to run some sort of server, which I'm sure have much more than 5% of users running a non-windows OS.
According to Netcraft, there are nearly 2500000 sites hosted on FreeBSD (source [netcraft.com]). This number does not include sites hosted on NBSD and OBSD (obviously).
"Everyone on here expects companies to spend millions in development and bend over backwards for their own purposes."
This wouldn't be millions in development. It would take one guy 10 minutes to e-mail the hardware specs (which they'd have to have available somewhere for them to have written their own driver) to the OpenBSD team and be done with it.
"Adaptec isn't interested in OpenBSD because it's not in their best financial interest, despite their best intentions."
Look at it this way, if you were a stockholder in Adaptec and were told millions of potential customers would not be able purchase your hardware because the company refused to release the specs for it, how would you feel?
ND
Re:Tried e-mailing the guy.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Battle with OpenSource (Score:3, Insightful)
Therein lies the fundamental misunderstanding... releasing specs does *NOT* give a competitor an advantage. What good does it do LSI to know that Adaptec's registers are little-endian? Or that tickling bit 4 of accumulator B will trigger an array rebuild? Documents only lay out the capabilities of a product, but do nothing to explain or detail the underlying silicon.
rule of thumb (Score:5, Insightful)
As a rule of thumb, if you are buying a piece of hardware, buy one for which known, good, independently-developed open source drivers exist. The existence of such drivers is a good indication that the hardware is well-documented, probably decently designed, and that it probably does what it is advertised as doing. And that's a good rule of thumb even if you are buying the hardware that you only intend to use with closed-source operating systems.
Re:Nothing ever changes at Adaptec (Score:1, Insightful)
Yes, it is. Not just because their stance on open source drivers, but because their own proprietary software sucks, too.
There are lots of good controllers out there that will even save you money compared with Adaptec; there is no need to buy Adaptec.
Re:Why just OpenBSD? (Score:3, Insightful)
Not anymore. NVidia has several chipsets (like the NIC used in nforce)) that they do not release documentation for, as far as I know.
Re:They *ARE* asking for support. (Score:2, Insightful)
My experience with graphics chips also led me to the conclusion that many chip vendors that refuse to release documentation don't themselves understand how their parts work fully enough to tell the world. Intel is one notable exception.
Re:Why just OpenBSD? (Score:4, Insightful)
As deservedly highly-rated as both your post and the grandparent posts are, the sentiments expressed are not the norm. There are many Slashdot sycophants who have championed buying nVidia video cards and dependence on nVidia to release the latest version of their binary-only video software.
Re:Tried e-mailing the guy.... (Score:3, Insightful)
> a very successful busines
Not to be a pedantic, but I think the Gates you're looking for is William Gates III. Wm Gates Jr is his lawyer father, who probably is as responsible for the success of MSFT as his son...
By the way, yes Theo can be a bit of a prick, but he's going after putting out simply the best version of BSD Unix around. It's why I've bought every release since the mid-2.x...
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:3, Insightful)
They want documentation for the hardware. Maybe a few hundred dollars for printing and shipping if they don't have it in electronic form. They must already have the docs, as they would be required for their own developers to write the Windows drivers.
This is a one time cost and can be recovered with a tiny number of sales. The OpenBSD developers want to do all the development themselves, so the costs to Adaptec once the docs have been released is zero.
"Adaptec isn't interested in OpenBSD because it's not in their best financial interest, despite their best intentions."
That would be why Theo put together a list of Adaptec customers that use OpenBSD. To prove that there is significant financial interest for Adaptec to give up the docs.
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps at this point I should quote part of Doug Anderson's reply?
Some choice quotes:
You say "We have to be realistic here and realize that we have to make it worth it for companies like Adaptec to support Linux or in this case, OpenBSD. Adaptec isn't interested in OpenBSD because it's not in their best financial interest, despite their best intentions." Well, from their email:
Why not? They aren't looking for specific support for ONE operating system. They are looking for documentation that explains how the hardware ticks. This has nothing to do with operating specific information: the operating system DEVELOPERS will work this out THEMSELVES, they don't want an Adaptec supplied driver!!! I would suggest that, by Adaptec's own admission if "you [OpenBSD] as well as many other flavors of Linux/Unix are looking for the same thing" then the OpenBSD project is not the only one having issues with Adaptec documentation and that the Theo has been the one to make the biggest stink about it so far.
Then we get this:
"We are coming out with an entire new rev of our firmware with the upcoming SAS/SATA-2 release in the July timeframe, and our plan is to provide a Software Development Kit (SDK), which will be generic in nature, and will have the documentation in hand that will help you to do the work on your side to continue to expand the support for Adaptec
products in your OpenBSD OS...."
So what?!? Are they saying that to get existing hardware working they have to wait till July AND OpenBSD users will have to update their existing firmware? What sort of response is this??? What's wrong with providing documentation for the existing hardware?
Which leads me to an interesting point. You say that "Everyone on here expects companies to spend millions in development and bend over backwards for their own purposes.", which is correct. If companies spend millions in development, they spend it because they want their customers and potential customers to get the most benefit from their products, and thus keep buying from them. That a company would spend millions on development and then drag the chain on documentation is, to put it frankly, pathetic and more than a little stupid.
Re:Tried e-mailing the guy.... (Score:5, Insightful)
You're not wrong. Is it just me, or does this de Raadt character get 'snippy' each and every time the world doesn't roll over and play the game how he wants them to?
There's quite some distance between demanding immediate obedience and 4 months of delays and excuses. Most businessmen don't stand for that either (or they go out of business).
An important point in a geek's career is the time when s/he recognises that if s/he's gonna get any further in said career, they're gonna have to maintain a business-benefiting attitude and act in business-benefiting ways else businesses won't employ you any more.
'Business benefiting attitude' does not mean sycophant or pushover. It means acting in the best interests of a company, sometimes whether they like it or not. Fact is, a lot of assholes succeed in business, mostly because they know how, to whom, and when to be assholes. A trained asshole is a powerful weapon.
Trouble is, geeks carry no weight in business, and the businessfolks have all the money. It's up to us to decide if we want some of that money or not.
Bullshit. How many CEOs of the Fortune 500 are MBAs and how many are technical people that learned business? You're confusing 'engineer' with 'asocial dweeb who lives in his parents' basement'.
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds to me like the OBSD guys said, "the drivers we've reverse-engineered aren't very stable, and we want more documentation so that we can make them stable for our existing users (of your hardware). If you won't give us that information, or persist in pretending to misunderstand what we want, then we will be unable to produce stable drivers for your hardware and we will refuse to release a driver with the instabilities we know of. We're in a hurry because our main coding time is coming up soon, and we've been asking for this for a while."
There is nothing that requires Adaptec to provide the necessary documentation. Nor is there anything which requires the BSD guys to release a driver that they know is buggy.
What I still don't understand is *why* Adaptec persist in refusing to allow a large, talented, motivated group of programmers to write a good driver for their hardware FOR FREE. If xBSD gets a working driver, then the other BSDs, Linux, etc. won't be far behind. Adaptec needs the server market, Unices are strong in the server market, more Unix drivers for Adaptec hardware means more people buying Adaptec hardware to run on free OS's, everybody wins! Except that Adaptec (apparently) won't play nice. How is that Theo de Raadt's fault?
Of course, I'm not within the loop at Adaptec, and so I don't know why they won't release documentation when it's needed. Perhaps they have some blindingly brilliant reasons why they don't want to release the information necessary to write fully functional drivers. What I do know is that it can't be seen from the outside, looking in.
In any case, I've had my share of trouble with Adaptec RAID cards under Windows. I probably wouldn't buy another one anyway.
Just a few thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)
First, Theo and the other developers, although making good points, are being quite rude to employees. I think that its important for them to push this issue, but I think they are handling it immaturaly. Flaming Adaptec (ex-)employees is not a good move, even if Scott did make a post on OSNews -- attack the companies economic base through a boycott instead.
Secondly, I think that if Theo and the gang started an organized boycott of Adaptec raid controllers in a professional manner, then got those people to sign a petition, write to Adaptec, and such along with getting a pretty accurate count of how many of Adaptec's raid controllers have been purchased by those boycotting Adaptec, they might be able to show themselves to be consisting of a large enough market to cause a dent in Adaptec's profits. Not only OpenBSD, but also FreeBSD, NetBSD, and Linux users who feel that its important to use open source drivers. This may require a bit of work, but its the most effective way to get Adaptec's attention. I mean, how many open-source Unix servers are using their raid cards? How many of those users, admins, etc. realize the importance of an open source driver so it can be maintained by the community, since most companies have been slow (to say the least) to update their binary drivers? Not to mention, the flexibility involved with porting it to different Open-source Unix OS's and using it with different software configurations and versions?
Thirdly, some people are arguing that that Adaptec will release an SDK in 4 months, but given the history of the Adaptec drivers and drivers by other companies, that would probably involve using a binary driver... which wouldn't help.
I think that if the open source OS's are going be taken seriously by vendors, then they need to act in a professional manner and show their economic strength through well-crafted reports and well-organized efforts.
I support the work of Theo and the other OpenBSD developers -- I believe they are right, but I think the open source community has to join together for a common cause and be professional about such things.
If we, as a community, can make this happen in a professional manner, and win, then maybe, just maybe, we can extend this to other vendors. If we can't pull together, then we're fighting a losing battle against closed source OS's such as Windows and venders such as Adaptec, and we might as well give up now.
We can do this, I know we can. But, we have to do it correctly. So, come on folks, act professional, realize what's at stake, and organize. Think of the visibility the grass roots democratic groups got when they organized and acted like a unified front -- they didn't win the election, but that was surely noticed.
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:3, Insightful)
It is a shame that you so grossly misrepresent the position of the OpenBSD people, and try to spin your ex-employer's position in a more positive light.
The OpenBSD people have a deadline on the near horizon, and they wanted to be able to include a non-buggy version of the driver in that release. They have been asking Adaptec for help for months, but to no avail. Then, when the OpenBSD people went public, Adaptec suddenly wonders what is the problem.
What I find sad in all this is that the OpenBSD people are being criticized for wanting to deliver free, quality, reliable, supported software to the users of OpenBSD. Our community should give them more support, not non-constructive criticism.
Re:Theo de Raadt (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, it's annoying that we have to wait four months, but at least they've promised something. - Seems they were saying much the same four months ago.
Frankly, I think Theo is being impatient and hotheaded. - He is indeed.
Stick a carrot infront of you, just out of reach, and slap your ass. You can follow that carrot forever, but it will get no closer. Sooner or later you will have to give up on the carrot.
If you don't give up on the carrot, you're being foolish. Sit down in the sand and demand better.
Re:Tried e-mailing the guy.... (Score:1, Insightful)
Adaptec doesn't provide documentation, OpenBSD doesn't provide drivers. If Adaptec wants to sell their hardware to people who use OpenBSD, they should provide the documentation.
If they don't care about the sales, then don't provide the documentation.
I suspect that Theo will win. You see, Adaptec needs customers more than Theo needs Adaptec.
Derek
Re:Why just documentation? (Score:3, Insightful)
The real clue to Adaptec's attitude (from the
Theo has taken the only course left to him, and publicly stating why OpenBSD 3.7 will be released without Adaptec RAID support. No doubt he is relying on public pressure on Adaptec to "play nice". As an IT consultant, I appreciate the problems that linux and the bsd variant development teams go through in trying to obtain cooperation from hardware manufacturers. It is also why I pay particular attention to hardware compatability lists when specifying new server configurations. I rarely (okay, never) specify MSFT Windows OS for my servers, and I will not support hardware manufacturers that play the "closed source/closed documentation/NDA/DMCA" game that has fueled MSFT's continued "embrace/extend/extinguish" monopolistic business practices.
Re:Tried e-mailing the guy.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, but that doesnt mean he's always wrong. Its probably best to judge him on what he's saying *at the moment*. Being argumentative is not nesseserily a bad thing, although he does put his foot in it more than is really a good idea
Thats not really true. I'm a geek and i have quite a lot of say in technical decisions. Our CTO is a geek also. I do not work for a technical company. I work for a publishing company.
If any company hires a technically minded person and then wont listen to his or her advice, they they they are wasting that person.
Would you hire an accountant and then ignore their advice about financial matters? if so, please tell me the company you are involved with so I can avoid accidentally getting hired there.
Any company that ignores the advice of its geeks is wasting a valuable resource. The companies I have worked for realise this.
That doesnt mean they are always right, however moderating conflicting advice is part of being a manager.
Re:Bad mod, bad! (Score:3, Insightful)
If you don't use OpenBSD because of its project leader, you may as well never use or communicate with any OpenSSH clients or servers and you can forget about PF. Just to be a real self righteous prick you may as well not use the internet at all just in case your packets pass through a server which an 'asshole' contributed to. Or a hardware design. In fact, how do you know assholes didn't grow the trees that maintain your oxygen supply? May as well stop breathing.
Re:Just a few thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm posting this on my Windows XP Home notebook. I tried at least 5 Free OSs, but I couldn't find a kernel that could control the fan and do suspend/resume reliably.
Over the last decade, the Free OSs have done surprisingly well at supporting hardware. But the last ten years have not yielded (to my knowledge) a hardware RAID card that can be fully-managed without closed binaries.
Lately it's been Theo and OpenBSD who've gotten down-and-dirty with the vendors and taken the heat for it but made an astounding amount of progress in getting them to open their docs. People said it couldn't be done with the wireless chipsets because of FCC regulations and all that, but they did it.
So I don't think people who are arguing for more of the same "please sir, may I have a closed binary for Linux x.xx.xx on Pentium 4s" have much of a position to argue from.