My favourite part of the GPLv2 is the torrent technicality[0]. I wonder if all those people seeding Linux distributions realise they're violating the license.
> The best way to make sure you are in compliance when distributing GPLv2 object code on BitTorrent would be to include all the corresponding source in the same torrent
> section 6(e) of GPLv3 is designed to give distributors—people who initially seed torrents—a clear and straightforward way to provide the source, _by telling recipients where it is available on a public network server._ This ensures that everyone who wants to get the source can do so, and it's almost no hassle for the distributor.
Also see, Ted Unangst's post about ZFS where he lists some criticisms[0] which somewhat expands on Brauer's criticism, and he talks about when he was interviewed on BSD Now[1].
Keep in mind that their criticisms are mostly about it not being a good choice for OpenBSD, although some of them apply across the board.
It's entirely inconsistent with Mozilla's past actions.
You can compile Firefox source code of which 100% of it came from released Firefox versions in Mozilla's HG tree and they won't let you call that "Firefox". Part of why IceWeasel exists is Debian wanted to backport security patches from Firefox releases into an older version (eg. apply security patches from Firefox 4 to Firefox 3.5) for Debian-stable and Mozilla wouldn't let them use the name Firefox if they did that.
Therefore your claim that
> Firefox is the UI chrome and corresponding stack
doesn't match the reality of what Mozilla has done. It seems now Firefox is anything that Mozilla calls Firefox.
What Mozilla won't let you call "Firefox": a version of Firefox where the only changes are security patches backported from a future version of Firefox (see: the Debian and IceWeasel debacle).
What Mozilla will call "Firefox": a wrapper around WkWebView that uses WebKit.
The examples are just examples, the uses in the tree are different. For example, ksh doesn't exit if pledge fails, it just prints an error about why it failed and keeps running (imagine how fun it would be the shell did just keep terminating). Other programs use their own logging to report the error, for example httpd logs the error the same way it logs all other fatal errors before it exits.
> I don't see how pledge is different from Capsicum which he criticises on this basis, one it is compiled in you cant disable it.
This is addressed in the slides. Capsicum is 5 years old and used in 12 programs because it is difficult to implement. Pledge is 6 months old and used in over 400 programs already.
> he dismisses SE Linux on that basis. I don't see why the same doesn't apply to pledge.
If you use a Linux distro that enables SE Linux, the second it gets in the way you can turn it off. If you install OpenBSD-current right now, all those utilities use pledge and you can't just turn it off.
> Theo is getting good results on tightening up the classic UNIX command line tools. Has he tried EMACS yet?
You may want to take a closer look at the slides about what has been pledged so far. httpd, smtpd, ntpd, relayd, slowcgi, xterm... They're not quite emacs, but they're also not just command line tools.
[0] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#BitTorrent