From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 26 04:14:24 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5E1E1065688 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:14:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Fraser@bacardi.frase.id.au) Received: from bacardi.frase.id.au (203-219-142-174.static.tpgi.com.au [203.219.142.174]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C4D08FC14 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:14:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Fraser@bacardi.frase.id.au) Received: from bacardi.frase.id.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bacardi.frase.id.au (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m8Q4ELop049579 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:14:21 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from Fraser@bacardi.frase.id.au) Received: (from Fraser@localhost) by bacardi.frase.id.au (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m8Q4EKRO049577 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:14:20 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from Fraser) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:14:20 +1000 From: Fraser Tweedale To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20080926041419.GA56030@bacardi.frase.id.au> References: <20080925084825.GA2728@kokopelli.hydra> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Subject: Re: Why not GNU cmp? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:14:24 -0000 --/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 08:41:23AM -0400, Bob McConnell wrote: > On Behalf Of Chad Perrin > >On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 08:34:50AM +0100, Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> Unga wrote: > >>=20 > >> >I was wondering why FreeBSD wrote their own version of cmp. If it > just the=20 > >> >license, then that's fine. I prefer the BSD versions of diff, etc. > when=20 > >> >available.=20 > >>=20 > >> You are asking the wrong questions: why did GNU write their own > version=20 > >> of cmp? FreeBSD's dates to 1987. > >=20 > > Y'know -- that's a really good question. >=20 > The answer is simple. The BSD license does not guarantee freedom as > defined by RMS. >=20 > * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0). > * The freedom to study how the program works and adapt it to > your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition. > * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor > (freedom 2). > * The freedom to improve the program and release your improvements > to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). > Access to the source code is a precondition. >=20 > For example, Microsoft uses many of the TCP applications and drivers > from BSD, but will not allow access to their source code as required by > freedoms 1 and 3. >=20 > Bob McConnell > The BSD license -is- a free software license as defined by the FSF. It is not copyleft like the GPL, but it is satisfies the four essential freedoms. RMS agrees. frase --/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkjcYZsACgkQPw/2FZbemTXrjgCeOgtve7+xC9DHwjU/HriocrFI 0WsAn2EvwTRsn+z6n9JRWXkn4x+0gQQQ =Ug6I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb--