Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 09:46:03 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org> Cc: Aryeh Friedman <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, d@delphij.net Subject: Re: viral license free fork of freebsd Message-ID: <20071006094251.H19939@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <4706F5C4.4070301@freebsd.org> References: <bef9a7920710042203r33e4c23axf3629e1e6f30a042@mail.gmail.com> <4705CA47.9090101@delphij.net> <20071005214506.X88717@fledge.watson.org> <4706F5C4.4070301@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Tim Kientzle wrote: >> It's not clear this is comprehensive, but it may still be useful in >> discussing replacing GPL'd components with non-GPL'd ones: >> >> http://wiki.freebsd.org/ContribSoftware > > Should we add a column indicating possible alternatives? Certainly. > For example, I'm working on a new cpio now, Kai Wang is working on binutils, > and I'm sure there are other projects in the works. > > I agree with other folks who have picked out GNU readline as probably the > most troublesome. The other GPL-licensed tools are generally separate > applications that could be fairly easily dropped from any particular > application (embedded applications probably don't need to distribute gdb or > gcc, for instance). For embedded systems, a non-GPL gdbserver might be useful. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071006094251.H19939>