Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 14:43:55 -0400 (EDT) From: "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net> To: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: More on the Intel-UNIX standard Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.02.9809211441550.16487-100000@sasami.jurai.net> In-Reply-To: <19980921133218.15796@follo.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, Eivind Eklund wrote: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pfgiffun@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co>, > > There's no need for the reference implementation to be GPL-contaminated > > - it can be shipped as patches to the Linux kernel rather than > > integrated with it, and those patches need not be GPL'ed. > > I don't think this is correct. I believe the patches would count as a > derived work, and thus would be covered by the GPL. :-( Isn't it ironic that the loudest 'free software' advocates would choose a license that is not. -- | Matthew N. Dodd |This space | '78 Datsun 280Z | FreeBSD/NetBSD/Sprite/VMS | | winter@jurai.net |is for rent| '84 Volvo 245DL | ix86,sparc,m68k,pmax,vax | | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | Are you k-rad elite enough for my webpage? | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.02.9809211441550.16487-100000>