Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:14:10 -0700
From:      Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
Cc:        freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer
Message-ID:  <4.3.2.7.2.20001129121021.049b31b0@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <200011291831.LAA19970@usr08.primenet.com>
References:  <4.3.2.7.2.20001129111306.0498bb60@localhost>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:31 AM 11/29/2000, Terry Lambert wrote:

>Or SAMBA, which we also shipped on the box?
>
>These were tactical, not strategic; shipping source for these
>wouldn't matter, since they don't contain any intellectual
>property that matters to anyone.  Let people demand the code
>if they want: we include a web page with links to the source
>to everything they could demand, right on the box.

It doesn't seem to me that this would avoid the problems
you mentioned earlier. GPLed code is still infectious.

[Snip]

>If you think these things would need to be exposed, then
>you've missed the concept of "embedded system": all InterJet
>administration was and is intended to be performed via a
>limited set of externalized interfaces, predominantly the
>web UI.

I understand embedded systems very well -- that's one of the
things I do. However, as we all know, selection is a much
less powerful paradigm than specification, and fixing a
box or using it to its full potential often requires the
power of a command line. What's more, the strategic UI code
almost certainly calls on such utilities to do its work and 
therefore depends upon them.

--Brett



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20001129121021.049b31b0>