OpenBSD Journal

4.2 Release Song - 100001 1010101

Contributed by merdely on from the ready-set-go dept.

Theo de Raadt announces the song for OpenBSD 4.2:

Just back from my (hiking) trip, I am happy to announce the 4.2
song has been added to the lyrics page at

	http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html

Yes, it is designed to sound like a mid-era Rush song, ie. something
from Grace Under Pressure or such.  And there's a few easter eggs
hidden in the song as well.  It also explains the inside sleeve
image...

The liner notes remind us that OpenBSD continues to release "secure, free, reliable software, that can be shared with anyone." OpenBSD continually adds support for new hardware without compromising its goals, avoiding binary blobs or entering into NDAs. The project's hard work is shared with anyone who can use it to aid in the progress of their own work. OpenBSD gets contributions back from some in the community, which gets added to the project (with proper credit given):

Give and get back some
Sharing it all
Path we know best
we're having a ball
Give and get zeros
Give and get ones
Given to you but
Not you to us
Opulent mission
Lost in our passion
The song warns of false, shallow victories (possibly one at the expense of others) reached by cheating to get ahead or compromising a project's goals:
Slow and steady wins they say
but this is not a race
It's not about who takes a prize
for first or second place

Imaginary rings of brass
Were traded for real goals
The vision and the mission lost
For those with corporate souls

If you have not already done so, buy a CD set (Order: EU or worldwide). The song comes as an audio track on CD 2. The song can also be downloaded: [mp3] or [ogg].

(Comments are closed)

Comments

  1. By baldusi (24.232.180.146) on

    If I'm not mistaken the title would be A©?

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward (218.214.194.113) on

      > If I'm not mistaken the title would be A©?

      How about Gold?

      I'll not tell my logic now 'coz it would be a spoiler if correct.

      ~|^
      =

      Comments

      1. By Matthew Dempsky (76.235.124.214) on

        > How about Gold?

        Maybe if there was an extra zero in the first number, but 100001 is `!', not `A' (or even `a').

        Comments

        1. By Anonymous Coward (213.118.238.47) on

          > > How about Gold?
          >
          > Maybe if there was an extra zero in the first number, but 100001 is `!', not `A' (or even `a').

          so than it's "not you" ...

    2. By Anonymous Coward (128.171.90.200) on

      > If I'm not mistaken the title would be A©?

      © is valid ascii

      100 0001 is `A`

      101 0101 is `U`

      the poster who said it was gold was close, the element symbol for gold is Au, with a lower-case u, but who am I to split hairs.

      Comments

      1. By Anonymous Coward (128.171.90.200) on

        > > If I'm not mistaken the title would be A©?
        >
        > © is valid ascii
        >
        > 100 0001 is `A`
        >
        > 101 0101 is `U`
        >
        > the poster who said it was gold was close, the element symbol for gold is Au, with a lower-case u, but who am I to split hairs.

        Doh, just realised it's 100 001 and not 100 0001

        They are quite right it's !U

        Excuse the noise

  2. By Gerardo Santana (189.133.156.49) gerardo.santana gmail on

    "We are here to have fun doing right."

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward (121.115.50.87) on

      > "We are here to have fun doing right."

      Yay, and you'll never lose.

  3. By Anonymous Coward (209.89.132.164) on

    Whoever wrote this song should do covers of Gowan.

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward (84.160.224.171) on

      > Whoever wrote this song should do covers of Gowan.

      Lyrics by Ty Semaka and Theo de Raadt.

      Comments

      1. By Anonymous Coward (192.6.19.202) on

        > Lyrics by Ty Semaka and Theo de Raadt.

        ...and the process is explained in -- what else could it be -- another track, OpenVOX
        :) Ty is 'da man! Great job guys!

  4. By Anonymous Coward (85.178.109.107) on

    Well it's propably the wrong place to ask but: How much RAM is supported by OpenBSD? I seriously can just find "outdated" answers. Are 4GB still the upper limit?

    Comments

    1. By Brynet (Brynet) on

      > Well it's propably the wrong place to ask but: How much RAM is supported by OpenBSD? I seriously can just find "outdated" answers. Are 4GB still the upper limit?

      That was vague, you're aware OpenBSD supports multiple architectures.. right? ;)

      But for i386, 4GB is an architectural limit..

      2 ^ 32 = 4294967296 bytes.

      After the Pentium Pro/Pentium 2 the address bus was raised to 36 bit, but I'm not certain if OpenBSD supports PAE.

      2 ^ 36 = 68719476736 bytes.

      If your processor is supported by the amd64 port, use it instead.. :)

      Comments

      1. By Anonymous Coward (74.115.21.203) on

        > If your processor is supported by the amd64 port, use it instead.. :)

        That doesn't help, despite more than one hardware donation to get AMD64 supporting > 4GB of RAM, it still doesn't.

        Comments

        1. By Brynet (Brynet) on

          > That doesn't help, despite more than one hardware donation to get AMD64 supporting > 4GB of RAM, it still doesn't.

          Really? I personally don't own a system with more then 4GB of RAM, but can a developer explain the technical reasons for the 4GB limit on a 64bit architecture?

          Thanks.

        2. By Anonymous Coward (85.178.75.178) on

          > > If your processor is supported by the amd64 port, use it instead.. :)
          >
          > That doesn't help, despite more than one hardware donation to get AMD64 supporting > 4GB of RAM, it still doesn't.

          I never saw a request for RAM or so?
          Was there ever a request? I personaly would love to see more OpenBSD Servers around (Database Servers and so).

          And I personaly have also a high demand for "more" RAM.
          Is the upper limit exactly 4GB or something like 3,5?

          And how can we (as users) help to improve this situation?

          Comments

          1. By rene (202.63.60.49) on

            > > > If your processor is supported by the amd64 port, use it instead.. :)
            > >
            > > That doesn't help, despite more than one hardware donation to get AMD64 supporting > 4GB of RAM, it still doesn't.
            >
            > I never saw a request for RAM or so?
            > Was there ever a request? I personaly would love to see more OpenBSD Servers around (Database Servers and so).
            >
            > And I personaly have also a high demand for "more" RAM.
            > Is the upper limit exactly 4GB or something like 3,5?
            >
            > And how can we (as users) help to improve this situation?

            From http://www.openbsd.org/want.html

            "An amd64 with more than 4 GB RAM for hacking on large memory support in i386 and amd64, needed in London, UK. Contact tom@openbsd.org."

            Comments

            1. By jsg (210.15.216.215) on

              > > And how can we (as users) help to improve this situation?
              >
              > From http://www.openbsd.org/want.html
              >
              > "An amd64 with more than 4 GB RAM for hacking on large memory support in i386 and amd64, needed in London, UK. Contact tom@openbsd.org."

              Also:

              "AMD64 or EM64T machine with 8GB+ of RAM (or $1700 to buy one) needed in Edmonton. Contact weingart@openbsd.org."

  5. By Rod Ross (74.235.10.31) on

    Was Terry Brown there, it sounds great and just like classic Rush. But really Tom Green is in Edmonton get him to play the song on his show or he will probably come to you Theo with video in hand ( Plus he plays drums, I am thinking 4.3 release song could be cut with him as a VIDEO ! )

    Comments

    1. By Rod Ross (74.235.10.31) on

      Also, I wonder what the 100001 1010101 stands for ? In the Rush song Body Electric it is 1001001 and it is a SOS.

      Comments

      1. By CODOR (CODOR) on

        > In the Rush song Body Electric it is 1001001 and it is a SOS.

        It's also the ASCII code for the letter I. I've always wondered if that was intentional...

  6. By Anonymous Coward (193.158.13.130) on

    BEST OPENBSD SONG EVER !

  7. By Anonymous Coward (81.83.46.237) on

    Shouldn't it be 1000001 instead of 100001?
    Else I don't get it ...

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward (81.83.46.237) on

      > Shouldn't it be 1000001 instead of 100001?
      > Else I don't get it ...

      Oh and yes, very good song (sound) ...
      Also very good explanation that comes with the song.

  8. By Chris (68.225.189.166) on

    I think Ty and Theo were here when they wrote the lyrics. :)

    http://www.confluence.org/photo.php?visitid=12793&pic=6

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward (213.118.238.47) on

      > I think Ty and Theo were here when they wrote the lyrics. :)
      >
      > http://www.confluence.org/photo.php?visitid=12793&pic=6

      LOL ^^

  9. By Aapo Lehtinen (m90) aapo.lehtinen@kotikone.fi on

    Awesome! This song will be playing even in my dreams for weeks ;-)

  10. By toxa (89.113.75.231) on

    I think, everybody found all easter eggs, not only in title:

    The window is a wall by now
    A sieve of sickened holes
    ^^^^^^^ WINDOWS

    The water chicken stealing maps
    Mistaking us for foes
    ^^^^^^^ LINUX

    The sun a son of Icarus
    Flies too close to itself
    ^^^^^^^ SunOS

    Forbidden fruit is blinded
    by the toys upon the shelf
    ^^^^^ APPLE


    :P

Latest Articles

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]