From owner-freebsd-current Mon Aug 3 09:18:34 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA17981 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 09:18:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from horst.bfd.com (horst.bfd.com [12.9.219.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA17973 for ; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 09:18:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ejs@bfd.com) Received: from HARLIE.bfd.com (bastion.bfd.com [12.9.219.14]) by horst.bfd.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA00363; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 09:16:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 09:16:59 -0700 (PDT) From: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" To: Terry Lambert cc: Peter Wemm , osa@serv.etrust.ru, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Sendmail-8.9.1 in -current & in 3.0-RELEASE??? In-Reply-To: <199808030638.XAA11787@usr01.primenet.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > I see no conflict between the original UCB copyrighted code and the entire > > backage being under a more restricted "umbrella" license. Yes, it's > > unfortunate that there are extra restrictions, but that's life. Considering > > how sendmail development is now being funded, we came out of it pretty well > > I think. > > The Sleepycat license (the dbm code required by sendmail is under this > license) is insidious in that it is effectively GPL. Sendmail 8.9.1 has no problems using the FreeBSD db code, DB 2.0 is not required. I think the actual requirement is for something at least as new as 1.5, though they do talk about bugs in 1.5. In the future, DB < 2.00 compatibility may be phased out (not discussed, just being realistic) but it hasn't happened yet. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message