From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 23 21:37:05 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DF1F16A417 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 21:37:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sthalik@tehran.lain.pl) Received: from mail.in5.pl (rollercoaster.insane.pl [213.251.173.13]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB97743D45 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 21:36:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sthalik@tehran.lain.pl) Received: from c182-250.icpnet.pl ([85.221.182.250] helo=enkidu.local ident=Debian-exim) from Debian-exim by mail.in5.pl with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (envelope-from ) id 1GnMFj-00040d-ML; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 22:37:03 +0100 Received: from sthalik by enkidu.local with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GnMFf-0002Ee-Vv; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 22:37:00 +0100 Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 22:36:59 +0100 From: Stanislaw Halik To: John Birrell Message-ID: <20061123213659.GA8405@localhost.localdomain> Mail-Followup-To: John Birrell , freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <2b22951e0611212109t69b01400q5eb0ba15b028ce68@mail.gmail.com> <20061122051359.GA42639@what-creek.com> <4564B095.3000002@evilphi.com> <20061122214505.GB48004@what-creek.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061122214505.GB48004@what-creek.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-User: sthalik Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: KDTRACE is gone? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 21:37:05 -0000 On Wed, Nov 22, 2006, John Birrell wrote: >> Which restrictions do you see preventing the distribution of a >> DTRACE-enabled GENERIC kernel binary? I would refer you to sections >> 3.1, 3.4 and 3.5 of the license[1], which state: >> - the CDDL is mandatory on the source code distribution; >> - the original copyright notice for the original work must be displayed; >> - binary distributions of CDDL-licensed software may be relicensed; >> The requirement for the last is that the new license not conflict with >> the CDDL. The CDDL doesn't otherwise restrict use, modification or >> distribution and includes the ability to sublicense the original code as >> well as and derived works. >> Someone please point out the conflict. I don't see one. > FreeBSD's policy is to ship a GENERIC kernel which is entirely BSD > licensed. Kernel modules and other kernel options can include other > licenses, but the options enabled in GENERIC must be BSD licensed. Why isn't importing it as a non-default option acceptable? I believe a lot of users would be happy to include it in their custom kernels.