Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:13:47 -0800 From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> Cc: db@db.net, perryh@pluto.rain.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, ivoras@freebsd.org, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>, Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why not give git a try? (was "Re: [head tinderbox] failure on amd64/amd64") Message-ID: <AANLkTikGK4m9cz5iiRtj=8Qzt0%2B-62SUG3mNmzqogpJn@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201101262000.p0QK0fGT005251@fire.js.berklix.net> References: <20110125140517.GA74156@freebsd.org> <201101262000.p0QK0fGT005251@fire.js.berklix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Julian H. Stacey <jhs@berklix.com> wrote: > Hi, > Alex >> order to build the system. the VCS however is not part of the build tool= chain >> however (except 'make update' maybe). > > Some good points, =A0but also remember make release also uses cvs > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 grep CVS /usr/src/release/Makefile For convenience reasons, just like cdrtools exists purely for utility in release as well. As long as the license doesn't say "[if you use our tool,] ur srcs are ours", then I don't see why license matters here. As and long as we package the source with the OS and all of our changes, or provide the ability to install it via a port, we should be ok. clang, llvm, compiler_rt, etc are a different can of worms as the GPLv2 // LGPLv2 is viral and says "[if you use our tool with your srcs,] ur srcs have to be open" (paraphrased of course), which doesn't work for companies who have proprietary IP. Thanks, -Garrett PS IANAL.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTikGK4m9cz5iiRtj=8Qzt0%2B-62SUG3mNmzqogpJn>