[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: L4-hurd discuss
From: |
Daniel Martin |
Subject: |
Re: L4-hurd discuss |
Date: |
Sun, 26 Jun 2005 13:02:59 +0100 |
Hi everyone.
On Sun, 2005-06-26 at 01:00 +0800, Neil Santos wrote:
> On 19:32 25/06/05, Benno wrote:
>
> > Right, the specific comment seemed to imply a problem with BSD licensed
> > software, not BSD kernel. Or to put it another way to above comment
> > doesn't mention a problem with a GNU/*BSD system due to technical
> > problems with the *BSD kernels, but simply due to the fact that they are
> > licensed under the BSD license. If I mistunderstood the point then I
> > apologise.
>
> Okay, this is going to mess things up a bit more, but...
>
> I *do* have a problem with BSD-licensed software; or, rather, I have a
> problem with the BSD-style licenses (and all other
> free-but-not-copyleft licenses). That is, I have a problem with using
> a free-but-not-copyleft license for anything I create, but I *don't*
> have a problem with using other's softwares.
>
> I'll even help with it, if I'm able. Or steal from it, and make the
> derivative copylefted, if possible. If you think this is not much
> better (if at all) than what some proprietary developers have done
> (and are doing), I won't argue. That's just the way I do things.
The BSD license is both free and GPL compatible, so surely that makes
the BSD kernels a better choice for monolithic kernels that the
OpenSolaris one?
I see no problem with relicensing BSD works to the GNU GPL. Surely if
the BSD authors are prepared to allow their work to be molested in to
non-free software then they can't complain when their work is reborn
copyleft. The choice was made when they chose the BSD license I don't
see anything wrong as long as the terms of the license are upheld. Just
as I don't see anything wrong when BSD software is made non-free. The
authors choose to allow this.
The GNU/kFreeBSD project is the GNU operating system running on top of
FreeBSD's kernel, which is licensed under the BSD license. I can't
imagine them going off and supporting a non-free fork of the kernel. If
the FreeBSD project suddenly decided to make it non-free then I expect
they would fork the kernel rather than support the new non-free kernel.
Of course I expect `GNU' (that operating system Alfred releases from
time to time!) will be far nicer when it reaches maturity. (GNU
incorporates the official kernel replacement of course, ยต-kernel + the
Hurd.)
> Like (I think) I've previously said, I'll only share if you'd share,
> but I won't let anyone else share.
You lost me! :-)
Best wishes,
Daniel.
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, (continued)
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Neil Santos, 2005/06/23
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Lee Braiden, 2005/06/23
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Matthew Dempsky, 2005/06/23
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Neil Santos, 2005/06/24
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Benno, 2005/06/24
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, David Leimbach, 2005/06/24
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Benno, 2005/06/24
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Neil Santos, 2005/06/25
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Benno, 2005/06/25
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Neil Santos, 2005/06/25
- Re: L4-hurd discuss,
Daniel Martin <=
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, David Leimbach, 2005/06/26
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/06/26
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Neil Santos, 2005/06/27
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/06/27
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Leonardo Pereira, 2005/06/27
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, David Leimbach, 2005/06/28
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Leonardo Pereira, 2005/06/28
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Francisco Andrades, 2005/06/28
- Re: L4-hurd discuss, Leonardo Pereira, 2005/06/28
Re: L4-hurd discuss, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/06/25