Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 17:49:08 -0800 (PST) From: Sean Eric Fagan <sef@kithrup.com> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kirk's soft-update integration.. Message-ID: <199802050149.RAA23069@kithrup.com> In-Reply-To: <240.886636132.kithrup.freebsd.hackers@gringo.cdrom.com> References: Your message of "Wed, 04 Feb 1998 10:31:39 PST." <34D8B40B.41C67EA6@whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <240.886636132.kithrup.freebsd.hackers@gringo.cdrom.com> you write: >Ummm. I still completely fail to see why OpenBSD was able to >integrate all the hooks AND make the two "encumbered" (sorry >to use that word ;) files available on their web site without >any such hoop-jumping. Because, as long as the source is distributed, nothing else need be done. Guess what, this is exactly like the GPL! Only not the GPL. If you read the fourth clause, it requires, like the GPL, that the entire program's source be included, although it is much more ambiguous than the GPL, and that may be Kirk's intent. >As amancio says, why can't we just ftp the files from >someplace? You can. Go ahead. No problem. You can even put it on a CD-ROM. No sweat. But if someone wants to make a product that does not give source code to the customer, they need a license from Kirk. Of course, if you do include it in the default system, I'll assume that's a sign that GPL'd code can also be included in the default system.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802050149.RAA23069>