From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Mar 17 23: 0:16 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.lariat.org (lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E865337B9A3 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2000 23:00:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by lariat.lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA14508; Fri, 17 Mar 2000 23:58:12 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000317234800.03e7c380@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 23:58:10 -0700 To: Terry Lambert From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: On "intelligent people" and "dangers to BSD" Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in (Rahul Siddharthan), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200003180633.XAA05681@usr02.primenet.com> References: <4.2.2.20000317173928.040fec50@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 11:33 PM 3/17/2000 , Terry Lambert wrote: >If all I do is utilize SAMBA, that is, I have it installed and >running, and I don't invest any of my intellectual property in >it, then I really don't care if it is GPL or whatever, because >it's exempted by the "mere agregation" clause of the (L)GPL, and >it can't "infect" my code, so why should I bother with the effort >of replacing it with a "clean" version that does the same thing? To avoid the collateral damage done by the GPL, and to prevent it from eliminating all other alternatives. Also, if there is a non-GPLed equivalent, you are likely to contribute to it, report bugs so that it is made better, etc. All of this palliates the most serious effect of the GPL: that it destroys other options and leaves you locked in, with no choice. >I end up spending money to no effect, just so I can be a puritan >about license, which makes no sense. Again, there are very practical reasons for wanting a BSD-licensed version to exist. The BSD-licensed version will give you an alternative, and will encourage vendors to produce commercial products with that functionality too. This is a good business decision. The fact that GCC does not have BSD-licensed competition is one of the main reasons that there are few decent alternatives left for non-Microsoft platforms. Borland seemed like a hopeful possibility, but now they are GIVING THEIR COMPILER AWAY under pressure from GCC users who claim that they'll scorn it otherwise. I fail to see how they can make any money from it. And that will mean insufficient money spent on development, support, and promotion. In short, "Kylix" may well be stillborn -- long before it might have gotten to the FreeBSD platform. Thanks to GCC. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message