Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 09:24:51 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, FreeBSD-CURRENT Mailing List <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: db 1.85 --> 2.x or 3.x? Message-ID: <200005021524.JAA23506@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <v04220802b53497c902d8@[195.238.1.121]> References: <10849.957266163@critter.freebsd.dk> <v04220802b53497c902d8@[195.238.1.121]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Sleepycats license is not FreeBSD compatible :-/ > > I don't understand. Reading > <http://www.sleepycat.com/license.net>, it seems to me that FreeBSD > meets all the necessary requirements. Can someone who understands > the details of the licensing issues either explain the situation to > me, or provide pointers to references that do? Sure, I built a commercial application on FreeBSD. It looked up usernames (which use DB routines). Therefore, according to the licensing scheme, I must now give away the entire source code to my commercial application. Second issue. I use FreeBSD in an embedded system. In order to not *have* to distribute source code to my application, it's in my best interest to strip out any GNU and similar code from the system before I 'ship' it. (Which allows me to ship binaries to make the distribution of my product easier). However, I'm not using the newer DB routines, so I must now provide source code to *everything*, and pointing to the FreeBSD site is not adequate, because there are no time limitations, and FreeBSD might yank the distribution on their site before a customer stops using my hardware. Is that easier? Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200005021524.JAA23506>