From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jan 28 22:22:21 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id WAA07252 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 28 Jan 1996 22:22:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA07247 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 1996 22:22:18 -0800 (PST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.6.11/8.6.9) id BAA08755; Mon, 29 Jan 1996 01:18:58 GMT From: "John S. Dyson" Message-Id: <199601290118.BAA08755@dyson.iquest.net> Subject: Re: Unzip for package tools (was re: FBSD 2.1) To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 01:18:58 +0000 () Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, nate@sri.MT.net, Hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199601290627.QAA09708@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at Jan 29, 96 04:57:30 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > John S. Dyson stands accused of saying: > > At work, where we might end up deploying FreeBSD based boxen, if it is > > an application where it is embedded, and source is not easily redistributed, > > we will remove EVERY LAST BIT OF ENCUMBERED CODE. The company that I work > > for has deep pockets, and is very sensitive to such issues. > > I understand this; in your situation would you be shipping the package > tools with the system? If you did, would your customers be unable to > either access the net or obtain the Zip source code from you? And if so, > would you be unwilling to negotiate with the InfoZip people to reach > an intermediate agreement? They seem to be very reasonable. > > I'm not arguing here, just curious to know what direction you're pointing in. > Our customers would be provided with ONLY a execute-only environment -- almost like being rommed. I really don't have many problems with GPLed code in a development environment, but in an execute enviroment in manufactured product -- it is problematical. But if the world never heard of GPL, it would be nicer. :-)... But in reality, there could be a much worse alternative to GPL so the world could be much much worse -- so it isn't really all that bad. John Dyson