Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 16:29:31 -0600 (MDT) From: Godmar Back <gback@cs.utah.edu> To: rjs@fdy2.demon.co.uk (Robert Swindells) Cc: alk@pobox.com, freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG, archie@whistle.com Subject: Re: Daemonising a Java Process: Possible? Message-ID: <199809082229.QAA07059@sal.cs.utah.edu> In-Reply-To: <199809082154.WAA00626@fdy2.demon.co.uk> from "Robert Swindells" at Sep 8, 98 10:54:00 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Robert, > I am currently looking at taking the JIT from Kaffe-0.9.2 and building it > into a shared library that will load into our JDK. > > The reason for picking 0.9.2 is that it was the last version released > under a BSD style licence, so we would be able to just release the > binary for it. > Who is "we", if I may ask? The FreeBSD porters of Sun's JDK? If so, why a binary-only release? Is that your decision or would that result from the licensing restrictions Sun puts on your port? >From my knowledge of the history of Kaffe's licenses, this would appear to be the kind of behavior that led Transvirtual to using the (more restrictive) GPL in the first place. Also, I must agree with Archie here. The actual legal document does not talk about "never seen Sun's code." It is, however, true, that none of Sun's code is looked at while developing Kaffe code. Not being a lawyer, that seems a wise course of action to me. Do you feel that the latter restriction should be lifted? - Godmar To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809082229.QAA07059>