From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 3 12:42:05 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A74A516A4CE for ; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:42:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ims-1.prv.ampira.com (ims-1.ampira.com [66.179.231.26]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ED8143D41 for ; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:42:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kamalp@acm.org) Received: from [202.142.94.194] (helo=[172.16.3.26]) by ims-1.prv.ampira.com with asmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1CaChw-0002C1-Pi; Fri, 03 Dec 2004 07:38:45 -0500 Message-ID: <41B05F10.5010505@acm.org> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:11:52 +0530 From: "Kamal R. Prasad" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Devon H. O'Dell" References: <41AE3F80.1000506@freebsd.org> <41AE6E98.1070202@telus.net> <200412031152.32859.freebsd@redesjm.local> <41B05C0C.9050503@sitetronics.com> In-Reply-To: <41B05C0C.9050503@sitetronics.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: Peter Kieser cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org cc: Jose M Rodriguez Subject: Re: My project wish-list for the next 12 months X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 12:42:05 -0000 > > Anaconda is also GPLed and also requires a good few changes for most > of it to run under FreeBSD. I haven't made any of these changes, but > we looked into using Anaconda in DragonFly before we started on our > own installer, and it would have just been too much work for the > deadline we had (our 1.0 installer was written in less than 3 > months!). Yes, it is in Python, but all the VESA stuff is via > framebuffer, not an X server, so it's not something that we could use > easily. At least, this was the case when I researched it in May. > Anything GPL probably won't qualify in the first place, due to obvious > license incompatibilities. Sorry for going off on a tangent -and pl ignore if its annoying:- Can someone elaborate on the impact of GPL if one is to use lGPL'ed code without modifying it. i.e. if the kernel or library is GPL'ed and a module is developed on top of it and sold, does the GPL require one to give out the src code for the developed module too? thansks -kamal